LYT2 Task 3 City of Seabreeze Virtualization Adoption Plan!

Given the City of Seabreeze’s declining revenue stream and resultant financial situation, as well as simple good government, it is critical that the city find ways of reducing expenses while continuing to provide the services needed by the citizens of Seabreeze. This includes the city’s use of information technology. Technology investments cannot simply be eliminated, as they are a critical component of the city’s infrastructure on which key city services rely upon. Therefore it is necessary to identify technologies which can produce a greater return on investment (ROI) through reductions in the total cost of ownership
(TCO) of the city’s technology assets. One approach that would meet this need that has been identified is the adoption of server, storage and desktop virtualization technology.
These technologies not only represent a significant opportunity for the City of Seabreeze to reduce costs, but it will also enable the city to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, raise IT staff efficiency, and improve disaster recovery capabilities.

1. Virtualization benefits
The term “virtualization” refers to technology that enables a single physical device, such as a server with a large pool of resources (CPU, memory, disk, etc.), to be logically segregated into smaller separate “virtual machines”, or “VMs” that are each given their own subset of resources based on their actual utilization requirements. According to IT-Online
(2008) a Gartner white paper found that the average server uses less than 10% of its available computing capacity in a 24 hour period. This trend will continue to grow as advances in the speed of server hardware outpaces the resource requirements of the city’s applications. Without virtualization, whenever there is a need for a new system or application the city must purchase and allocate an entire new physical server and its associated, network capacity, floorspace, cooling and power requirements. Thus wasting approximately 90% of the server’s actual capacity and significantly reducing the ROI of the new system. At an average cost of around $5000 per sever, not including costs such as the electricity required to operate and cool the equipment, needed network ports, etc., this means that the city is potentially wasting thousands of dollars for each of the 72 servers it currently maintains. By contrast a single physical host server that is properly configured to provide a platform for virtual servers can reach utilization rates as high as 65-70% or more
(it is important to leave some room for sudden peak utilization) by supporting between
10-15 virtual servers. The city could therefore potentially consolidate its existing server infrastructure from 72 physical servers down to somewhere between 5 and 10depending on actual utilization rates. This would not only reduce the costs associated with acquiring and refreshing server hardware that has an expected life of around 4 years (Dix, 2005), but all the auxiliary costs associated with operating the city’s server infrastructure such as electricity, floorspace, cooling, etc.!
The reduction in energy costs associated with server virtualization also significantly reduces the city’s greenhouse gas footprint, and strain on California’s overtaxed power grid.
In a state such as California that places a high priority on the environment this can be an additional highly visible and welcome benefit to adopting virtualization technology. Aggar
(2011) also points out in The IT Energy Efficiency Imperative that:!
“The underutilization of IT assets wastes money and takes a toll on the environment that extends far beyond the energy consumed by hardware.
Computer manufacturing is a resource-intensive process, many of the materials and energy resources are damaging to the environment when extracted or processed, and some are in increasingly short supply." Aggar (2001) reports that a typical rack of server equipment, somewhere between 5 and 10 servers, utilizes an average of 175,200 kWh per year not including costs for cooling.
Implementing server virtualization and consolidating the city’s servers into a single rack, from the approximately seven in use today, would reduce the city’s power use by 1,051,200 kWh per year; generating a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by over 725 metric tons of
CO2. That is the equivalent amount of greenhouse gasses produced by burning 81,530 gallons of gasoline according to the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. This is on top of an approximate savings of $22,000, based on the Department of Labor’s estimated cost of electricity in Southern California of $0.215 / kWh. By reducing the total number of physical servers running the city would also significantly reduce the amount of power needed to cool their facilities, resulting in an even larger cost and energy savings for the city above what has already been calculated. In addition to the hard costs associated with unused computing resources, it can take up to several weeks of IT staff time to acquire and properly provision a new physical server, increasing these cost even more. Server virtualization significantly reduces the amount of expensive IT staff time needed to provision and maintain servers. A new virtual server can literally be setup in a matter of minutes, and many previously needed administrative maintenance tasks are either no longer necessary or can be automated by the tools that manage the virtualization environment. According to the white paper Beyond Cost Savings:
Justification for Virtualization Expansion provided by IT World (n.d.), “Many companies that have implemented virtualization have reported IT productivity gains, with 73 percent seeing significant reductions in time spent on routine administrative tasks”. By reducing the amount of IT staff time that is needed for setting up and manage the city’s servers these employees can focus more time on more strategic initiatives that provide more value for the residents of Seabreeze.With virtual servers that rely upon an abstracted layer known as a “hypervisor” that simulates a standard set of hardware devices, instead of actual physical hardware, every virtual server can have the same device drivers and be very easily be moved from one host system to another without the need for any changes or reconfiguration. Often times virtual servers can even be migrated from one physical host to another without any disruption to end-users. By separating the operating system and applications from the hardware this would enable the city to greatly improve their ability to recover from a serious disaster, such as an earthquake, or even a minor disaster like a failed CPU fan on a server. This ability to easily move virtual servers between hosts also means that some maintenance that used to require IT staff to work nights and weekends, potentially incurring overtime expense for the city, can now be done during standard business hours. Overall virtualization can help the city not only reduce costs, but also improve the availability of services, and make the city more resilient in their ability to recover quickly from a disaster situation; which is when the residents rely on the government the most. !
In addition to implementing a virtualized server infrastructure the city would also benefit from virtualizing its desktop computer systems as well. A Virtualized Desktop
Infrastructure (VDI) solution offers the same benefits of reducing costs, increasing energy efficiency, and improving the manageability of the city’s desktop computers that server virtualization provides. VDI would allow the city to replace its 350 end-user workstations with a much less expensive “thin client” and approximately 5 servers. With a VDI implementation the computational resources are transferred from the desktop to the centralized virtualization servers. Thin clients typically cost only about a third of what a traditional desktop computer would cost. As PC hardware continues to make improvements in performance that outpace the needs of typical end-users the city is paying for increased amounts of unused resources. VDI allows the city to recapture those unused computing resources and make them available when and where they are needed. Desktop computers also typically waste over 75% of the power they consume according to Aggar
(2011). Also by centralizing all the computers operating systems and applications it makes it much easier for IT staff to manage and maintain the systems. !
In order to support both server and desktop virtualization the city would also need to implement a virtualized storage solution, known as a Storage Area Network or SAN. A
SAN works by creating a single large pool of storage (disk drives) that can then be divided up and connected to all the city’s servers. The city currently uses direct attached storage, meaning that each physical server has its own set of disks that only it can access. If each server had only 100GB of unused space that would mean that the city was paying for over
7.2TB of unused storage that would be inaccessible by any other systems. With VDI this would increase even more dramatically. Most users typically have well over 100GB of free hard drive space on their desktop computers. A SAN would allow the city to reduce its overall storage capacity by allocating all this unused storage where it is needed. Most SANs offer capabilities to remove any duplicate files, and compress files that are not used frequently. This reduces the need to purchase expensive storage even further. A SAN also enables the VMs to be loaded onto any host server that has access to the SAN. This enables the city to easily move VMs between hosts for maintenance and performance tuning purposes. A SAN is a necessary component to a virtualization strategy, but it also offers many benefits and cost reductions itself.

2. Offsetting potential negative implications of virtualization
With all the benefits to implementing virtualization technology there are some potential negative implications as well that would need to be addressed. By centralizing all the city’s desktop and servers onto a small set of physical hardware it increases the impact of a hardware failure. If a VDI server goes down it will take down up to 50 end-users with it, where if a single desktop pc has a problem only that one user is affected. It would be necessary to ensure that the infrastructure was built with sufficient capacity to handle at least a partial loss, and the right tools put in place to quickly migrate any virtual machines to a new host. Virtualization technology does make it much easier to deal with this type of situation, but planning for it needs to be done in advance.!
A virtualized environment would also require new approaches to security and data protection. Many of the older tools used by the city would not work as well or effectively with virtual systems. These tools would either need to be replaced or updated to newer versions which are designed with a virtual infrastructure in mind.!
Another potential issue with a virtualized environment, particularly with the desktop infrastructure, is it places a much greater reliance on the city’s data network. To effectively implement VDI and even server virtualization the city would need to ensure that its network offers sufficient performance and reliability to take advantage of the new technology. A detailed analysis of the existing network infrastructure, that assessed its performance and capacity to handle a virtual environment would need to be conducted.
There will likely be areas of the city’s network that would need improvements or enhancements to fully support the capabilities that virtualization technology would offer.!

3. Current state of virtualization technology diffusion
Virtualization technology was originally developed in the 1970’s for use on IBM mainframes. The technology has continued to mature and has seen significant increases in adoption over the past 10 years. Today virtualization is common place, with many companies and organizations using virtualization to reduce costs and improve IT service delivery. According to Hill (2011), “nearly 92 percent of all enterprises use at least some form of virtualization”. Microsoft began including virtualization technology in all its Windows
Server operating systems starting in 2008 and has continued to focus on making significant enhancements to its Hyper-V virtualization platform. The industry leader in virtualization platforms, VMware has continued to show steady growth in its year-over-year revenue. It is clear that virtualization technology is nearing market saturation and has become a de facto standard tool used by large enterprises and SMBs.

4. Potential barriers to virtualization adoption
Primarily the largest barrier to the city adopting virtualization technology is the significant cost associated with a project of this size. Adopting server, storage and desktop virtualization would require a significant capital investment in new hardware, software and implementation services. The city’s IT staff also does not have much experience working with virtualization technology and would require training and support to bring them up to speed. Given the current political climate that is hyper-focused on cost cutting it may provide to be very difficult to gain the support of city leaders and residents to make such a large investment, despite the large potential for a significant ROI that would ultimately reduce the city’s IT costs by a large margin. Additionally virtualization technology is a complex and technical subject. City leaders and influential residents, who may not have as much experience with technology may not initially be comfortable discussing such a solution. This lack of familiarity may create additional reluctance to investigate virtualization technology as a means of reducing the city’s expenses.

5. Building support for virtualization adoption
Given the significant initial investment that would be needed for the City of
Seabreeze to implement virtualization it is critical that a process for building support for the project begin as early as possible. Initially a detailed project proposal should be developed by a core group of stakeholders including the city administrator, IT director, and other department heads, with a focus on clearly defining the business objectives the city was looking to achieve and exactly how the new technology would enable the city to reach these goals. A further analysis of the city’s servers, applications and network should be conducted to provide a better scope for the project. This would enable the city to begin the process of acquiring initial cost estimates that are more realistic than those provided in this plan.
With better cost estimates the city could then prepare a more thorough ROI analysis to include in the business justification. Once a high level plan is developed and more detailed financial projections are available a presentation should be put together to introduce the city council to the key concepts of virtualization and how the project would impact the city’s finances as well as the other benefits it could provide to the city’s operations. In order to maintain support for such a large project a high degree of transparency will be required. I would recommend making the proposal and financial analysis publicly accessible and encourage residents to ask questions and provide input on the project’s scope, perhaps at a special public hearing on the topic. Clear “talking points” should be drafted that highlight the benefits of the project and made available to all city employees so that they have a better idea on what the project is and how it will benefit the residents of the city.
Employees should also be encouraged to provide input and feedback on the project. I would also recommend sitting down with the local paper and providing them a background on the technology and its potential impact on the city. This would help educate the city’s residents on the topic and keep them informed of the goals of the project and demonstrate that the city is committed to not just spending less, but spending more strategically, reducing costs even further.

6. City technology adoption
Given the extensive rate of diffusion that virtualization technology has gained and the city’s lack of adoption of the technology up to this point, the city would likely fall in either the late majority or laggards section of the Roger’s innovation adoption curve. Figure
6-1 (Wikipedia, 2012) shows the comparison between the market share (yellow) of a technology and the technology adoption curve (blue).
Figure 6-1: Technology adoption curve"
With virtualization technology somewhere near 90% (Hill, 2011) this clearly places the city in either of the later stages of technology adoption, most likely the late majority.
Late majority technology adoption is characterized by those who may be skeptical about new technologies and only implement new technologies after the majority are already doing so. Given the city’s attitude towards accepting new technology it will be necessary to provide significant justification and concrete example of the benefits of the project.
Gathering examples of other similar cities that have successfully implemented virtualization and are currently realizing the benefits from these projects will be a critical strategy to facilitate the city of Seabreeze’s adoption of virtualization technology.

7. Addressing city employee technology acceptance
The city’s s slow pace of adopting virtualization technologies could be a result of a lack of information. The city employees are trained in using technology for everyday tasks, but have limited exposure to new technologies. By ensuring the city employees receive information about the technology and how it will impact their daily work life will be critical.
I would recommend that the city launch their virtualization adoption with several pilot programs. These programs would allow the city to become familiar with the technologies involved and begin to realize their benefits. Employees participating in the pilot programs would also be given the opportunity to provide feedback that could then be incorporated into the larger rollout of the technologies. This would then help address the concerns of other end-users proactively creating a greater chance that the users will adopt the new technologies more easily, and have a more positive experience.

References
Aggar, M. (June 2011). The IT Energy Efficiency Imperative. Retrieved March 17, 2014 from http://www.microsoft.com/environment/IT_Energy/IT_Energy.aspx! Dix, J. (2005). When to upgrade: Insiders share rules of thumb about equipment life cycles.
In Network World. Retrieved March 17, 2014 from http://www.networkworld.com/ supp/2005/tips/112805-lifecycle-tips.html! EPA (n.d.). Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. Retrieved March 17, 2014 from http:// www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/calculator.html! Hill, B. (July 20, 2011). Virtualization Reaches 92% Enterprise Penetration Rate, VMware
Leads the Way. In DailyTech. Retrieved March 18, 2014 from http:// www.dailytech.com/Virtualization+Reaches+92+Enterprise+Penetration+Rate +VMware+Leads+the+Way/article22212.htm!
IT-Online. (April 16, 2008). Virtualization: anything but a passing fad. In Server Trends Blog.
Retrieved March 17, 2014 from http://it-online.co.za/2008/04/16/virtualisationanything-but-a-passing-fad/!
IT World. (n.d.). Beyond Cost Savings: Justification for Virtualization Expansion. Retrieved
March 17, 2014 from http://resources.idgenterprise.com/original/
AST-0091263_BeyondCostSavings.pdf!
United States Department of Labor. (n.d.). Average Energy Prices, Los Angeles-RiversideOrange County – January 2014. Retrieved March 17, 2014 from http://www.bls.gov/ ro9/cpilosa_energy.htm! LYT2 TASK 3!

Wikipedia. (2012). File:Diffusion of ideas.svg. Retrieved March 18, 2014 from http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Diffusion_of_ideas.svg! 13