DevOps vs. ShadowOps (Pulse 2013)


Published on

Development teams are challenged to deliver more content with less time and with greater agility. In some cases, Lines of Businesses are examining alternative strategies involving a mixture of public and private cloud to deliver their business applications. Sometimes, the need for speed leads to bad decision making and the adoption of non-compliant technologies. These "shadow ops" activities may not meet the compliance and standards set by your organization. You can discourage these practices by improving your responsiveness to the needs of development. Come learn about how Continuous Delivery technology from Rational & Tivoli can help you defeat Shadow Ops by providing a better alternative!

Bala Rajaraman, IBM Distinguished Engineer
Michael D. Elder, IBM Senior Technical Staff Member

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Time Magazine cites lateness to the web as a key factor in Borders demise .
  • Talk about the downside of trying to optimize for only one of these extremes. E.g. you can bludgeon dev with a bunch of processes and checklists to ensure nothing bad ever happens but it could cause you to miss opportunities. Likewise if you go too fast without considering process, you could open security vulnerabilities, experience severe outages, etc. Tie back to previous slide (emerging importance of cloud) and acknowledgign the “Public Cloud End Around” problem where dev teams use their corporate card to deploy to the public cloud, stepping around the operations organization.
  • Another cultural and process gap is that operational orgs and development orgs have very different notions of what it means to be “done, with quality”. Some of these different concerns are described in the text under the ops and dev people above.
  • Next: Code/Cloud
  • Next: Delivery Pipeline
  • IBM IOD 2011 04/08/13 Prensenter name here.ppt 04/08/13 01:13
  • DevOps vs. ShadowOps (Pulse 2013)

    1. 1. DevOps vs. ShadowOpsBala Rajaraman, IBM Distinguished EngineerMichael D. Elder, IBM Senior Technical Staff Member © 2012 IBM Corporation
    2. 2. Please noteIBM’s statements regarding its plans, directions, and intent are subject to change orwithdrawal without notice at IBM’s sole discretion.Information regarding potential future products is intended to outline our general productdirection and it should not be relied on in making a purchasing decision.The information mentioned regarding potential future products is not a commitment, promise,or legal obligation to deliver any material, code or functionality. Information about potentialfuture products may not be incorporated into any contract. The development, release, andtiming of any future features or functionality described for our products remains at our solediscretion.Performance is based on measurements and projections using standard IBM benchmarks ina controlled environment. The actual throughput or performance that any user will experiencewill vary depending upon many factors, including considerations such as the amount ofmultiprogramming in the user’s job stream, the I/O configuration, the storage configuration,and the workload processed. Therefore, no assurance can be given that an individual userwill achieve results similar to those stated here. 2
    3. 3. DevOps vs. ShadowOps How do business challenges motivate behavior? What do we mean by “Shadow Ops”? How do you enable DevOps to be more attractive than ShadowOps? 3
    4. 4. How do business challenges motivate behavior? Adapt or Disappear 44
    5. 5. IT leaders are leveraging the transformational power of cloud to balance optimization of existing systems and innovation IT Innovation Optimization • Improve agility & dexterity of • Enable mobile, intelligent business infrastructure, rapid development • Deliver secure IT without Cloud • Speed delivery of new boundaries products & services • Reduce Risk • Drive new business models & client relationships Processes New models of client engagement 55
    6. 6. Systems of Engagement and Systems of Record 66
    7. 7. 10 years ago - Then and Now Web sites augmented  Web, Mobile, & Social business revenue, but platforms differentiate, brick and mortar still engage, and permeate the dominated customer relationship Borders (Bookstore) had  Borders (Bookstore) revenue of $3.39bln2 doesn’t exist1 – But Amazon still has great deals!  Facebook is moving to Web sites could be release to production twice released over a period of a day3 months 7
    8. 8. Motivating Use Cases • LOB need for new solutions to “..get closer to their customers…”INSURANCE • Address millennial generation of customers and interaction models (social, mobile) • Enhance current Sales System with a multi-channel integration system that provides for sales (quoting) and service of all products to Agents, Call Centers and direct to Policyholders • LOB need for new solutions to engage customers in-store and over web channels RETAIL • Address customer acquisition, customer retention, customers interaction in-store (coupons, promotions) and metrics such as average revenue per user (social, mobile, analytics) • Enhance current retail systems with a multi-channel interaction • New solutions to engage citizens driven by Smarter Cities & GovernmentGOVERNMENT • Address citizen interaction with local government resources (social, mobile, analytics) & PUBLIC • Integrate current systems (e.g. work order management systems) with a multi-channel interaction leveraging GPS, GIS and SECTOR mobile devices • Making the work environment for sellers & sales managers simpler, social, more integrated, and insightful…” IBM Social • Applications that utilize CRM tools and integrates IBM Sales tools to deliver an integrated solution Business • Enhanced with social network mapping and expertise location (e.g. LinkedIn) • Integrating CRM applications with social, mobile and analytical capabilities • LOB capabilities for short-term marketing campaigns aligned to events (e.g. sporting events)MARKETING • Dynamic engagement of customers and end-users (e.g. ASICS “Support Your Marathoner” multimedia campaign at the ING & SALES NY City marathon) • Rapid creation of applications and integration with variable demands leveraging social, mobile, multi-media and analytical capabilities 8
    9. 9. Line of Business ExpectationsSearch Algorithm Release Process at Google Release Process at WealthfrontRelease Automation at Etsy Release Automation at flipkart 9
    10. 10. What is “Shadow Ops”? Circumventing Central IT Regardless of Risk 1010
    11. 11. Ops Safe Enterprise Traditional IT DevOps DeveloperSlow Fast Public Cloud “End Around” Risky 11
    12. 12. Problem: Disparate notions of quality Ops DeveloperDid deployment succeed? Did the app compile?Are transactions succeeding? Did unit tests pass?Is performance OK? Did the app get packaged OK?Any new errors in the logs? 12
    13. 13. Shadow Op 1: Public Infrastructure as a Svc Use Case Potential Risks LOB wants to deliver a new end  Is the remote dev environment user capability and fast secured? Work Request to IT returned with  Has a VPN tunnel been opened long estimate to stand up OS back into the company network? LOB opens account with cloud  Who handles the outage? platform  Do the images in use meet company LOB leverages public cloud to deliver new capability firewall requirements? Causes Our Point of View Image catalog improves time to  Provide a reusable image catalog of delivery is faster than Work Request compliant OSes to enable to IT innovation internally Leverage configuration scripts to  Support on-demand requests for automate deployment cloud patterns LOB uses OpEx instead of CapEx to  Apply automation to provide re- control budgets short-term usable services without waiting for people 13
    14. 14. Shadow Op 2: Public Platform as a Svc Use Case Potential Risks LOB wants to deliver a new analytic  Is customer data properly secured? capability capability  Was any security testing done LOB wants to leverage Hadoop to against the architecture? look for user buying trends in  Will we have a bad PR experience customer data in the event of a breech? Developer builds a prototype leveraging Platform as a Service on top of Hadoop Causes Our Point of View LOB needs to deliver more revenue  Provide a catalog of services to this quarter provide specific capabilities based Not delivering may mean a new GM on business need: Hadoop, Web next quarter Containers, etc Developers unfamiliar with how to  Where it makes sense, ensure any setup the platform, but know SPI data externally is obfuscated programming model 14
    15. 15. Shadow Op 3: Public Software as a Svc Use Case Potential Risks LOB has low survey results from  Is this consistent with the internal customer interactions CRM solution? (If there was one Need a better CRM solution to before this) improve sales results  Are all SOX-404 rules met w.r.t SPI Sign contract with a SaaS CRM  Are other LOBs doing similar provider things? Same contract terms? Causes Our Point of View  Long lead time to evaluate,  Apply rigorous automation to help purchase, and roll out CRM solution roll out new capabilities faster  We need to drive better results this  Evaluate whether a public SaaS quarter, not just this year option makes sense for the overall business and Central IT strategy and set policies around it 15
    16. 16. Shadow Op 4…n: Your Use Case Use Case Potential Risks What use cases have you  What risks did you encounter? observed? Causes Our Point of View What were the motivating factors?  Central IT must adopt techniques to How much was business driven vs. streamline the delivery process; technology driven? without these improvements, LOB will continue doing more “end- arounds” to meet the business pressure 16
    17. 17. How can you compete with “Shadow Ops”? Software Defined Environment 1717
    18. 18. Enabling DevOps from Central ITCapabilities and User Experience Today Emerging Primary Workload Types Transactional Transactional + Big Data, Analytics, Mobile/Social Channels Delivery Model Planned Incremental (DevOps) Development and Operations Team Sizes 100s and Costly 10s with built-in DevOps automation Release Frequency Months to Years Days to Weeks, based on business opportunity Integration Frequency Weeks Continuous Infrastructure Deployment Days Minutes Time to Value Planned Opportunistic Built in to application, Recovery Oriented Operational Model Systems Management Computing, Continuous Availability Consume and Assemble Service Sourcing Develop (Public and Private) 18
    19. 19. Streamline Delivery Apply changes to deliverables (code, config, patterns, workflows) Best PracticeDeliver Changes Workflow AutomationTestAutomationProductionConfiguration(Code/Scripts)Virtual Patterns 19 19
    20. 20. Streamline Delivery Manage Deliverables in a Definitive Media Library Best PracticeDeliver Changes Workflow AutomationTestAutomation Manage Manage Deliverables Deliverables RepositoryProductionConfiguration(Code/Scripts)Virtual Patterns 20 20
    21. 21. Streamline DeliveryDeploy and configure a virtual environment Manage Manage Provision Provision Deliverables Deliverables Environments Environments Repository Private Cloud 21 21
    22. 22. Streamline DeliveryTest to ensure delivered changes don’t break the application Provision Provision Verify Verify Environments Environments Changes Changes Private Cloud 22 22
    23. 23. Streamline DeliveryDashboard test results in common location Verify Verify Changes Changes 23 23
    24. 24. Streamline DeliveryPromote to production using best practice workflow automation Monitor & Monitor & Maintain Maintain 24 24
    25. 25. Streamline Delivery Deliver Changes, Manage Deliverables, Provision, Test, Dashboard, Monitor Best PracticeDeliver Changes Workflow AutomationTestAutomation Manage Manage Provision Provision Verify Verify Monitor & Monitor & Deliverables Deliverables Environments Environments Changes Changes Maintain Maintain Repository Private CloudProductionConfiguration(Code/Scripts)Virtual Patterns 25 25
    26. 26. Where do I start? Specific Techniques 2626
    27. 27. Traditional Hand-off – Written Instructions Installation Instructions RedHat Linux1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut laboreet dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi utaliquip ex ea commodo consequat.2. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id estlaborum. Apache Web Server1. Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantiumdoloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventoreveritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo.2. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sedquia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Nequeporro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur,3. adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et doloremagnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Python1. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipitlaboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur?2. Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihilmolestiae consequatur,3. vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur? 27
    28. 28. Provisioning using a Software Defined Environment .jsp .html Infrastructure .java as Code .sh chef recipes Source Artifacts Source Control Management 28
    29. 29. Virtual Images in the Catalog 2929
    30. 30. Leveraging Reusable Automation 3030
    31. 31. Conclusion Central IT must adapt in order to support business needs X as a Service (Infrastructure, Platform, Software etc) provides greater flexibility to support rapid prototyping and delivery We’re on this journey together 31
    32. 32. Acknowledgements and Disclaimers:Availability. References in this presentation to IBM products, programs, or services do not imply that they will be available in allcountries in which IBM operates.The workshops, sessions and materials have been prepared by IBM or the session speakers and reflect their own views. They areprovided for informational purposes only, and are neither intended to, nor shall have the effect of being, legal or other guidance oradvice to any participant. While efforts were made to verify the completeness and accuracy of the information contained in thispresentation, it is provided AS-IS without warranty of any kind, express or implied. IBM shall not be responsible for any damagesarising out of the use of, or otherwise related to, this presentation or any other materials. Nothing contained in this presentation isintended to, nor shall have the effect of, creating any warranties or representations from IBM or its suppliers or licensors, or alteringthe terms and conditions of the applicable license agreement governing the use of IBM software.All customer examples described are presented as illustrations of how those customers have used IBM products and the results theymay have achieved. Actual environmental costs and performance characteristics may vary by customer. Nothing contained in thesematerials is intended to, nor shall have the effect of, stating or implying that any activities undertaken by you will result in any specificsales, revenue growth or other results.© Copyright IBM Corporation 2013. All rights reserved.  U.S. Government Users Restricted Rights - Use, duplication or disclosure restricted by GSA ADP Schedule Contract with IBM Corp.  Please update paragraph below for the particular product or family brand trademarks you mention such as WebSphere, DB2, Maximo, Clearcase, Lotus, etcIBM, the IBM logo,, [IBM Brand, if trademarked], and [IBM Product, if trademarked] are trademarks or registered trademarksof International Business Machines Corporation in the United States, other countries, or both. If these and other IBM trademarkedterms are marked on their first occurrence in this information with a trademark symbol (® or ™), these symbols indicate U.S.registered or common law trademarks owned by IBM at the time this information was published. Such trademarks may also beregistered or common law trademarks in other countries. A current list of IBM trademarks is available on the Web at “Copyright andtrademark information” at you have mentioned trademarks that are not from IBM, please update and add the following lines:[Insert any special 3rd party trademark names/attributions here]Other company, product, or service names may be trademarks or service marks of others. 32