From: Darby Weaver (darbyweaver@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Mar 03 2007 - 02:31:08 ART
Hi John,
I recall back in the day working for a company where
we used a managed services company to manage a PIX
Firewall. It was kind of interesting as I recall,
since anytime we wanted changes we had to basically
tell them exactly what we needed command per command
and thetn they would implement. They were supposed to
maintain an SLA, but we always had to call them to ask
why we were down - my manager was actually making
money every month in credits from the ordeal. We
thought it comical.
======================
Freeze-frame today:
Today I work for a company that offers managed
services to a select vertical market.
We actually monitor all of the metrics to that appear
in our SLA.
The team I am part of, we actually manage networks,
that is, all manner of networks. Cisco, Nortel,
Foundry, 3Com, etc. I'd say 95% Cisco.
We have new customers and of course they are qualified
before the ink is wet.
Now, I'm a bit of a stickler for what I call "due
diligence" and so is the company or at least any
company I've worked for seems to head in that general
direction.
This means that if there is a problem with a piece of
equipment, due diligence requires, we report the
problems to the appropriate authority - either open a
ticket or make a change management request, etc. and
fix anything in accordance with our schedule and as
agreed and approved by the site authority.
Now, if when I happen upon a router, switch, nms
station, firewall, or other device offering network
infrastructure services (my realm), that has more than
a little issue, again I notify and create an action
plan - sometimes a project plan, to eliminate or
mitigate the problems identified.
But wait, no bandaids here, I always take it a step
further to bring a given device to a certain level of
standards (personally I am fond of NIST) but hey, to
each his own. And this of course leads to more work.
Not always billable, but if a network is
well-maintained, it allows me to manage more networks
in a more scalable fashion.
When these networks are typically over 10,000 users,
one does not have time to not do it right.
One problem network, and the rest will suffer, so one
must perform a diligent discovery, report all
discrepancies, create an action plan, notify the
proper authorities of required remedial activities and
costs, if applicable, and then schedule the work.
My advice: Get an SLA that both you and your managed
services provider can both live with and support.
But in general, I think results will vary.
--- john matijevic <john.matijevic@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Team,
> Right now we manage our current frame-relay
> infrastructure seperate PBX
> phone in remote locations and data. We are looking
> to move to an mpls VOIP
> solution where one company would provide all the
> solution and also provide
> managed services. My question is people that have
> used managed services,
> what has been your experience so far as compared to
> when you managed it
> yourself. Has it been more cost effective? Has it
> changed for you
> technically? Please discuss offline.
>
> Sincerely,
> John
>
> --
> John Matijevic
> U.S. Installation Group
> 954-969-7160 ext. 1147 (office)
> 305-321-6232 (cell)
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 01 2007 - 06:35:50 ART