Docstoc

Active Directory Domain Services Upgrade.Charter.08272010

Document Sample
Active Directory Domain Services Upgrade.Charter.08272010 Powered By Docstoc
					                                                 Project Charter
Charter Classification: Hardware/Software Upgrade

Project Name:                                    Active Directory Domain Services Upgrade

UM Business Unit:                                Division of Information Technology

Department:                                      System & Operations

Strategic Priority:                              Goal 4: Provide a robust and reliable IT infrastructure.

Executive Sponsor:                               David Crain

DoIT Sponsor:                                    Bryan Roesslet

Prepared by:                                     Michele Byers

PGC Project Plan Review:                         Not Required

Architectural Review:                            Pending


Project Charter Version Control
Version          Date             Author                   Change Description

1.0              8/27/2010        Michele Byers            Document created



1.1              10/14/2010       Michele Byers            Executive Sponsor edits incorporated



1.2              10/15/2010       Terry Robb               Reviewed.



1.3              10/15/2010       Michele Byers            PMO edits incorporated.



PGC Review Status
Date                                 Type                  Presented by       Outcome
                                                           Presenter
Click to enter date                  Charter
                                                           Name
                                                           Presenter
Click to enter date                  Plan Check-Up
                                                           Name



University of Missouri - For Internal Use only               Page 1 of 5                              Current as of: 12/19/2011
Project Charter
                                                 Project Charter



1.        Maintenance or Hardware/Software Upgrade Project Overview
          1.1.       Microsoft released Windows Server 2008 R2 to manufacturing July 22, 2009
                     and Active Directory Domain Services October 22, 2009. In order to upgrade
                     the domains administered by the Division of IT, all domain controllers must
                     be running Windows Server 2008 R2. In addition, the Division of IT has
                     assumed responsibility for the operations of the UMHC domain controllers and
                     needs to implement standardization across the supported domains.
          1.2.       Beginning July 13th, 2010, Microsoft moved to the Extended Support phase
                     for Windows Server 2003. Implications include falling out of support within
                     the next two years as the successor product has been released. The entire
                     active directory forest cannot leverage the features of Active Directory
                     Domain Services if the Division of IT fails to upgrade the supported domains.


2.        Goals and Objective
          2.1.       The goal of the project is to upgrade all domain controllers to Windows Server
                     2008 R2 as well as each of the domains to Windows 2008 R2 functional level.
                     Additional tasks will optimize the Active Directory environment.
          2.2.       Project Objectives:
                     2.2.1. Address hardware lifecycle, software lifecycle, and right-sizing.
                     2.2.2. After performing a network and security audit, address any identified
                            issues.
                     2.2.3. Remediation of applicable Dell Exchange/AD health check findings.


3.        Scope
          3.1.       High-Level Deliverables (In Scope)
                     3.1.1. Division of IT domains will be at a Windows 2008 R2 functional level.
                     3.1.2. Provide documentation for Division of IT administered domains
                            including dependencies and points of failure.
                     3.1.3. All production domain controllers will be under a hardware service
                            contract.
                     3.1.4. Create a road map document describing mid-term direction for Active
                            Directory Domain Services.
                     3.1.5. Identify metrics that accurately reflect the health and operational state
                            of Active Directory Domain Services, including a process to collect data
                            for historical reference.
          3.2.       What will not be delivered (Out of Scope)
                     3.2.1. Upgrade of forest functional level.
                     3.2.2. Domain consolidation.




University of Missouri - For Internal Use only      Page 2 of 5                   Current as of: 12/19/2011
Project Charter
          3.3.       Success Criteria
                     3.3.1. Above goals are accomplished without negative customer impact.
                     3.3.2. Documentation has been created and accepted.
                     3.3.3. Active Directory Domain Services passes ISAM security review.


4.        Target Date for Completion
          4.1.       July 31, 2011


5.        Budget/Resources
          5.1.       List Division of IT groups required:
                     5.1.1. System Administration
                     5.1.2. ISAM
                     5.1.3. Networking
                     5.1.4. Enterprise Architect
                     5.1.5. Marketing and Communications
          5.2.       Capital Resources Required (Hardware, Software, Consulting, Other):
                     5.2.1. Server Hardware
                     5.2.2. Operating System Licenses


6.        Constraints
          6.1.       Some hardware is out of warranty.
          6.2.       DoIT has yet to upgrade to Windows Server 2008 R2.
          6.3.       Service level agreement with ITS is not yet final.


7.        Assumptions
          7.1.       Staff will be available.
          7.2.       Capital budget will be released.
          7.3.       Cross project considerations between Active Directory Domain Services and
                     Identity Provisioning Process Redesign Recommendations.


8.        Interdependencies
          8.1.       Systems:
                     8.1.1. Radius/Wireless/VPN
                     8.1.2. Shibboleth
                     8.1.3. Any system that relies on LDAP for authentication and authorization.
                     8.1.4. Any system that uses native AD authentication and authorization.


University of Missouri - For Internal Use only     Page 3 of 5                  Current as of: 12/19/2011
Project Charter
          8.2.       Other projects:
                     8.2.1. Identity Provisioning Process Redesign Recommendation
                     8.2.2. AD MOU Project
                     8.2.3. Exchange 2010 Upgrade
                     8.2.4. Consolidated Logging
          8.3.       Other organizations/groups:
                     8.3.1. All business units.
                     8.3.2. Cerner/Tiger Institute
                     8.3.3. External vendors with firewall exceptions for LDAP.


9.        Risks and Opportunities
          9.1.       Risks
                     9.1.1. Lack of experience, training, and knowledge for current AD
                            administrators.
                     9.1.2. Current monitoring tools are insufficient therefore data is unavailable
                            for future decisions.
                     9.1.3. Overlap of resources with other projects and operational duties.
                     9.1.4. Recent transfer of AD responsibilities to Windows Server team.
                     9.1.5. Recent transfer of AD responsibilities for UMH DC’s to the Division of
                            IT.
                     9.1.6. Service level agreement with Cerner ITS is not yet final.
                     9.1.7. This service is core to the operation of the University and is high in
                            visibility and impact.
                     9.1.8. Unknown interdependencies.
          9.2.       Opportunities
                     9.2.1. Should there be a need in the future, completion of this project
                            ensures DoIT’s ability to raise the forest functional level.
                     9.2.2. Improved efficiency of administrative tasks through standardization.
                     9.2.3. Improved performance and reduced infrastructure complexity.
                     9.2.4. Reduced operational and capital expenses.
                     9.2.5. Improved support model of Active Directory service.




University of Missouri - For Internal Use only    Page 4 of 5                     Current as of: 12/19/2011
Project Charter
10.       Key Stakeholders
          Key Stakeholders are those stakeholders who can either prevent the project from achieving its full set of
          objectives or can cause the project to fail. Some of the stakeholders will also comprise the change control
          board. Identify who is Responsible, Accountable, must be Consulted, and must be Informed. Stakeholders
          may have more than one role. Make sure you include architectural review, business continuity/disaster
          recovery and financial issues as appropriate.

           Stakeholder                                     Role                               R        A         C       I
          David Crain                     Asst. VP Operations & Infrastructure                X        X         X       X
          Bryan Roesslet               Assoc. Director, Operations & Infrastructure           X        X         X       X
          Brian Dourty                       Manager, System Administration                   X        X         X       X
          Megan Hartz                      Team Lead, System Administration                   X        X         X       X
          Michele Byers                              Project Manager                          X        X         X       X
          Kevin Bailey                    Director, Customer Service & Support                                   X       X
          Wes Seidt                       Manager, Technical Services (Cerner)                                   X       X
          Bill McIntosh                   Manager, Technical Services (DNPS)                                     X       X
          Brandon Hough                               Manager, ISAM                                              X       X
          Beth Chancellor                   Chief Information Security Officer                                   X       X
          Brien Waage                               Enterprise Architect                                         X       X




University of Missouri - For Internal Use only        Page 5 of 5                            Current as of: 12/19/2011
Project Charter

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:127
posted:12/19/2011
language:English
pages:5