1 / 18

The Web Problem

The Web Problem. The website as it stands now does not make use of the current available technology, support or security that allows two-way communication or online transactions. Goal. Modern website supporting online transactions and two-way communication with customers. Stakeholders.

azure
Download Presentation

The Web Problem

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Web Problem • The website as it stands now does not make use of the current available technology, support or security that allows two-way communication or online transactions.

  2. Goal • Modern website supporting online transactions and two-way communication with customers.

  3. Stakeholders • Board Members, Staff and Management • Licensees • Public • Industry Professionals (Credentialing, etc.) • State Oversight (GITA, SPO, GAO, etc.)

  4. Objectives • Define architecture • Obtain new website hosting solution • Prepare business process documentation and in-house design • Partner with outside vendor for online implementation (application development, interfacing with internal systems, etc.)

  5. Define Architecture: • Options: • Self-hosting • Co-location • Managed Hosting • Shared Hosting

  6. Architecture Options • Self-hosting: Establish web server in our own office, on our own network. • Pros: Complete control – immediate response to agency needs and changes, managed alongside our internal systems. • Cons: Complete responsibility – hardware procurement and maintenance, environmental control, physical and network security, drain on bandwidth and other resources, etc.

  7. Architecture Options • Co-location: Provide agency-owned server in an outside vendor’s datacenter. • Pros: Nearly complete control – agency owns and operates hardware and software; vendor provides space, environmental control, physical security, network bandwidth. • Cons: Nearly complete responsibility – little or no vendor monitoring or support; response time increased due to physical distance from server; same procurement and maintenance requirements as self-hosting.

  8. Architecture Options • Managed Hosting: Vendor supplies and maintains hardware and basic software at the vendor’s datacenter. • Pros: Flexibility of control – vendor monitors hardware, software and security 24/7; provides bandwidth, environmental controls, backup units; outsourcing expertise available on demand. • Cons: Greater monthly cost, reliance on vendor’s SLA (service level agreement).

  9. Architecture Options • Shared Hosting: Vendor provides space on server, shared among several different “tenants.” • Pros: Lower cost, vendor provides all basic server requirements. • Cons: Little control of anything, limited technical capabilities; competition for hardware, software, bandwidth and other resources; 3rd party applications for other customers may reduce our uptime; our growth must also accommodate others on same web server.

  10. Recommendation • Managed Hosting provides the best balance between cost, flexibility and maintenance responsibilities.

  11. Objective 2 To bring the BOMEX website to a new server that offers us the ability to grow technologically while offering us the service, security and backup that we need.

  12. Vendors Considered • IBM • ADOA • STG

  13. Vendors Considered • IBM • Pros: Name recognition, reputation for quality, 24/7/365 monitoring and support, highest uptime, capacity for growth, outsourcing expertise, Tier 1 datacenter. • Cons: Price, flexibility.

  14. Vendors Considered • ADOA • Pros: Price. • Cons: Incorrect software, can’t use their SQL server, questionable uptime and available resources, have to purchase hardware (would be the same as co-location without the benefits of a real co-location vendor); poor reputation.

  15. Vendors Considered • STG • Pros: Price, security, 24/7/365 monitoring and support, high uptime, growth potential, personal service and consulting, small but professionally designed and equipped datacenter (former US West facility). • Cons: Little name recognition, smaller lower-tier vendor.

  16. Recommendation • STG currently provides the best balance of cost, quality, and personalized service. A 12-month contract meets immediate needs while providing future flexibility.

  17. Design and Implementation • Two “tracks” run in parallel: Design and Implementation. • First phase’s design leads to second phase’s implementation, etc. • Process has been designed in twelve-week (quarterly) increments, to balance workload while closely monitoring progress and adjusting course as necessary.

  18. Tracking Progress • Bi-weekly meeting to be held one day before the Executive Staff meeting. • Monthly meeting with the ED to ensure the plan is on the envisioned path. • Coordination with Web Team. • Other meetings to be held as needed.

More Related