SharePoint FIS and SharePoint FIS Licensing: Usage Scenarios (Part 2 of 2)

February 19th, 2012
Posted by: admin

By Bill Peters
AIS Network Director of Sales

In my January 24 blog, I provided some responses to frequently asked questions about Microsoft SharePoint Server 2010 for Internet Sites and licensing SharePoint FIS.

In this second part, we’ll look at SharePoint FIS licensing in a little more depth and also look at some various usage scenarios.*  For the purposes of this blog, “internal users” refers to employees, affiliates’ employees, on-site contractors and/or agents.  “External users” refers to all others.

What do I need for intranet and extranet sites?

For intranet and extranet networks used to support internal content, SharePoint Server 2010 is required.  If only internal users can access the content being stored, it must be hosted on a server licensed with SharePoint Server 2010.  It’s important to remember that content is only accessible by users or devices with a Client Access License (CAL) for SharePoint Server 2010.  SharePoint Server can still be used to support external content, although each user or device requires a CAL, whether they are internal or external.

What do I need for Internet sites?

For servers used to provide external content (typically) over the Internet, SharePoint FIS is required.  If the content being stored and accessed is available to external users, it can be hosted on a server licensed with SharePoint FIS, and users accessing that content will not require a CAL.  It’s important to remember that while SharePoint FIS is restricted to external content, it is not restricted to external users.  For example, an internal user (e.g., employee) would not require a CAL to access external content on an instance of SharePoint FIS.  As you can see, the choice between SharePoint Server and SharePoint FIS for external content is a financial one, unless the external users have anonymous access—in which case, SharePoint FIS is the only feasible option.

Can you show me some usage scenarios?

The following common deployment scenarios are excerpted from a very useful and detailed document entitled, “Microsoft Volume Licensing Brief:  Microsoft SharePoint Server 2010 for Internet Sites” (October 2010), which helps in explaining the licensing requirements of SharePoint FIS.  Although covered for user-based CALs, these scenarios can also be used for device-based CALs.  For a copy of the full document, just email me at the address below.

First, have a look at the color code for the diagrams:

SharePoint 2010

Color code for diagrams. Source: Microsoft Volume Licensing

SCENARIO A:  Intranet

Description: Internal users access information through LAN or the Internet. No other users (internal or external) have access to information or applications.

Example: A professional sports team sets up an intranet site accessed by managers, the coach, and players.  It is also used for support staff such as the physiotherapist who is an on-site contractor rather than an employee.  But the therapist still qualifies as an internal user.  A news reporter trying to access the SharePoint site is denied access.

Licensing:

  • Server — 1 SPS/Running Instance (RI)
  • Internal User — 1 CAL/User

Figure 1 – Scenario:  Intranet

SharePoint 2010 Sports Team Scenario

Source: Microsoft Volume Licensing

Key Takeaway:

  • Licensing requirements for server and CAL remain the same for internal users based on the location of access (through LAN or the Internet).

 

SCENARIO B:  Intranet Plus Extranet

Description: An organization with information accessible only by internal users (i.e., internal content) chooses to extend access to a limited number of identifiable external users.  In this case, the identifiable external users have access to all information, previously accessible by internal users only.   The organization may choose to license those external users either via SPS/CAL or SPSFIS for authenticated external users.  This decision is typically made based on cost.

Example:  The Elm University publishes research papers, which are made available to specific educators from other universities (external users).  This situation is assumed to be an intranet plus extranet scenario, even though the Elm University does not have a public-facing Web site.

Licensing:

  • Server — 1 SPS/RI
  • Internal User — 1 CAL/User
  • External User — 1 CAL/User

-or-

  • Server — 1 SPS/RI (for internal use), 1 SPSFIS/RI* (for external use)
  • Internal User — 1 CAL/User
  • External User:  No additional licenses required.

SPS/CAL Only

Figure 2A – Scenario:  Intranet Plus Extranet Without SPSFIS

SharePoint 2010 Elm University Scenario A

Source: Microsoft Volume Licensing

SPS/CAL Plus SPSFIS

Figure 2B – Scenario:  Intranet Plus Extranet with FIS

SharePoint 2010 Elm University Scenario B

Source: Microsoft Volume Licensing

Key Takeaways:

  • You can choose between SPS/CAL or SPSFIS based on what is more economical to them given the number of external users.
  • The licensing requirement for internal user varies depending on the server license chosen and use (publishing or internal use of information/applications).
  • The university chooses to make external content available to selective external users.  With SPSFIS licensing, no restriction is made on how many external users access that information.

SCENARIO C:   Internet

Description: Internal users are publishing information for external users.  It is not possible to identify some or all of external users, so you must license external users via SPSFIS.  Because internal users access the same information as external users, all users can be licensed via SPSFIS, and no additional CALs are required.

In another example, a team of internal users is customizing the look and feel of the Web site and testing it before the changes go live in production; CALs are not required if the internal users have MSDN licenses.

Example: News Web site, knowledge forums, and social networking sites

Licensing:

  • Server — 1 SPSFIS/RI
  • Internal User — Need no CAL
  • External User — Need No CAL
  • Test/Dev: If users are covered via MSDN, no additional server licenses/CALs are required.

Figure 3 – Scenario:  Internet

SharePoint 2010 Newspaper Publishing Scenario

Source: Microsoft Volume Licensing

Key Takeaways:

  • SPSFIS/RI is the only license required if internal users are accessing the same sites as external users.
  • Each staging server that is posting content requires its own SPSFIS/RI (same licensing requirement as production server).  This requirement excludes test staging servers because testing technical changes are covered under MSDN.

SCENARIO D:  Intranet Plus Internet

Description: You make some content available only to internal users, while other content is made available to anonymous external users.

You need one SPS/RI for the internal content, one CAL/user for all internal users accessing that internal content, and one SPSFIS/RI for the external content accessed by anonymous external users.  SPSFIS negates the need for CALs for internal users only publishing information and all external users.

Example: Woodgrove Bank offers loan information and the option to submit a loan application on its public-facing site, on which only internal users are allowed to view/work.

Licensing

  • Server — 1 SPS/RI for servers for internal information, 1 SPSFIS/RI* for servers for external information
  • Internal User (if only publishing) — needs no CAL
  • Internal User (otherwise) — 1 CAL/User
  • External User — needs no CAL

Figure 4 – Scenario:  Intranet Plus Internet

SharePoint 2010 Bank Scenario

Source: Microsoft Volume Licensing

Key Takeaways:

  • If internal users are only publishing information and SPSFIS/RI is being used for the servers, CALs are not required for them.
  • If the contents/information/applications accessed by internal users are different from those accessed by external users, SPS/CAL licenses are required for internal users.

SCENARIO E:   Intranet Plus Internet Plus Extranet

Description: In this scenario, one subset of information is available only to internal users, another subset of information is available to both internal users and authenticated external users, and a third subset of  information is available to anonymous external users.

Example: Contoso Pharmaceutials maintains a public Web site accessible by all, offers collaboration with authenticated external users on specific research and development  projects, and hosts company’s internal intranet for its internal users.

Licensing:

  • Server — 1 SPS/RI for servers for internal information, 1 SPSFIS/RI for servers for external information*
  • Internal User (publishing) — needs no CAL
  • Internal User (otherwise) — 1 CAL/User, External User à needs no CAL
  • External User —  needs no CAL

*In the case of dedicated server for extranet, users would have a choice of SPSFIS to cover all authenticated external users or extending CALs to them, as discussed in Scenario 2.

Figure 5 – Scenario:  Intranet Plus Internet Plus Extranet

SharePoint 2010 Pharmaceutical Company Scenario

Source: Microsoft Volume Licensing

Key Takeaways:

  • This scenario shows that the Internet plus intranet plus extranet scenario is no different than the sum of the individual scenarios.
  • An organization can choose to make external information available to selective external users. However, with SPSFIS licensing, no licensing restriction is made on how many external users can access external information.

This is so confusing.  Isn’t there someone who can help me figure this out?

Yes, as I mentioned in January, if you think SharePoint FIS licensing is confusing, you are not alone.  I’m happy to walk you through it and help you assess your organization’s needs.

Call me at 1-888-401-AISN, or email me at:  bill.peters@aisn.net.  Or, simply leave a comment below.  Best of luck!

 

 

Facing Rapid Growth, AIS Network Turns to Its Advisory Board

February 8th, 2012
Posted by: admin

By Laurie Head
AIS Network Vice President

In today’s fast-paced tech environment (and withered economic climate), positioning a cloud computing business for rapid growth can be all-consuming.   More than ever, we rely consistently on the clear vision, strategic insight and advice of our wonderful advisory board.  On Friday evening, we honored our board at a dinner near the AISN offices in Northern Virginia.  To our board, we say thank you — and expect an outstanding year ahead!

AIS Network Advisory Board

We honored our advisory board at a dinner on Friday evening.


Demand for Cloud, Partner Program Is Driving Growth at AIS Network

February 8th, 2012
Posted by: admin

Kurt Baumann

In the data center, Kurt Baumann doubled our cloud earlier this month.

By Jay Atkinson
AIS Network CEO

More companies are shifting from on-premise computing to cloud-based services, and that means cloud providers are attaining sales goals earlier than expected.  It’s plain to see why Forrester Research analysts are predicting that the private cloud market will double to more than $15 billion in 2020.

At AIS Network, we’re experiencing a good deal of that momentum too.  Yesterday, we announced that we have doubled the size of our public cloud several months earlier than anticipated.  Last year, we brought on more new customers in one year than in any single year of the company’s 19-year history.  Notably, at AISN, new cloud customers are outpacing more traditional managed hosting customers by three to one.

In large part, I attribute this growth to the great success of the AISN partner program, which we launched last March.  Through the support of our wonderful partners, we’ve added numerous new enterprise-class customers, particularly those needing customized, cloud-based SharePoint, SharePoint for Internet Sites (SharePoint FIS) and high-end SaaS applications.

Thanks to those who refer us and to those who partner with us.  Most especially, thanks to our terrific clients.  We are looking forward to another great year!

 

SharePoint FIS and SharePoint FIS Licensing: FAQs (Part 1 of 2)

January 24th, 2012
Posted by: admin

SharePoint for Internet Sites

Ferrari's Web site is designed using SharePoint for Internet Sites. For more examples, go to our SharePoint FIS hosting page.

By Bill Peters
AIS Network Director of Sales

Offering cloud hosting for Microsoft SharePoint Server 2010 for Internet Sites (SharePoint FIS) was a no-brainer for us.  After all, digital content creators’ interest in the cloud, and the mobile access it affords, is surging.

Including SharePoint FIS hosting among our product offerings represents the first of several steps that AIS Network will take to expand its cloud hosting services for professionals working in digital content creation fields such as Web development, design, publishing, film, architecture, advertising, marketing and public relations.

When you purchase a SharePoint FIS license from AISN, through the SPLA agreement, you automatically receive the “Enterprise” version.  This also provides licensing rights to “Fast Search Server” functionality.

But, what does all of this mean?

Here are some “Frequently Asked Questions” focused on what SharePoint FIS is and how to make some sense of SharePoint FIS licensing.  My next entry, Part 2 of this two-part blog, will include specific usage scenarios and how to handle licensing in those cases.

What is SharePoint FIS?

SharePoint FIS empowers creative teams to publish beautiful, interactive external Internet and extranet sites, while dramatically simplifying Web content management and administration.

Who uses SharePoint FIS?

Hosted SharePoint for Internet Sites (SharePoint FIS) is ideal for compliance-focused corporate enterprises, associations and institutions that need to interact with a large number of users via a public-facing Web site.  Digital marketers and design agencies, who need to launch multiple Internet/extranet sites quickly and easily, are also making great use of SharePoint FIS.   You’ll find some examples on our SharePoint FIS hosting page.

What are my SharePoint FIS licensing options?

SharePoint FIS comes in two flavors, Standard and Enterprise.  SharePoint FIS Standard is scoped for a single domain only and has standard SharePoint features for unlimited users (anonymous or authenticated).  SharePoint FIS Enterprise, on the other hand, is scoped for multiple domains and has enterprise SharePoint features for unlimited users (anonymous or authenticated).  According to Microsoft…

SharePoint Server FIS Standard:

  • Helps small and mid-size organizations create public-facing Internet sites or basic extranets.
  • Provides licensing for the same features as the Standard CAL for SharePoint Server.
  • Designed only to be used for creating and hosting a single site resolved from a single domain name (such as aisn.com) and its subdomains (such as support.aisn.com).
  • When combined with active Microsoft Software Assurance, it’s eligible to be stepped up to SharePoint Server for Internet Sites Enterprise for an additional fee.

SharePoint Server FIS Enterprise:

  • Designed for enterprises to create externally-facing public Internet sites and secure private extranets using the full capabilities of SharePoint Server.
  • Provides licensing for all SharePoint Server features (the same as SharePoint Server Enterprise CAL).
  • Offers the rights to host an unlimited number of sites and/or domains.

So, SharePoint FIS Standard is for just one domain?

Yes, SharePoint FIS Standard can only be used to support a single site and its related subdomains on a single domain.  Because the licensing of SharePoint FIS is per running instance, you can run more than one site/domain using the Standard edition only if separate running instances are used for each site/domain and a unique license of SharePoint Server 2010 for Internet Sites Standard is allocated for each running instance.

Does SharePoint FIS Enterprise have FAST Search?

Yes.  For use in Internet/extranet scenarios, this server license also includes the rights to FAST Search. You can deploy a single server license of SharePoint FIS Enterprise as a SharePoint server OR a FAST Search server—but not both concurrently.

How is SharePoint FIS licensed?

SharePoint Server for Internet Sites is licensed per running instance.  No Client Access Licenses (CALs) are required, even for authors creating content.  When using SharePoint FIS for licensing external-facing scenarios, you must have a server license for all servers that are used to deliver content to external users – regardless of the farm configuration or whether or not users are directly accessing that server (staging, application, front-end, or index).

Servers in a development/test environment are exempt from this rule assuming they are covered by MSDN® developer program licensing. According to Microsoft, the underlying logic in this is that all servers supporting a specific solution (internal vs. external and production vs. development test) must be licensed similarly (i.e., in the CAL/Server model, the per-server “For Internet Sites” model, or the MSDN developer program). This is independent of the order in which information moves through servers.

What if I only need an intranet built on SharePoint?

Intranet sites are licensed using a Server/CAL (Client Access License) model.  SharePoint Server 2010 is required for each running instance of the software, and CALs are required for each person or device accessing a SharePoint Server.

This is so confusing.  Isn’t there someone who can help me figure this out?

Yes, you’re not alone in thinking that SharePoint FIS licensing is confusing.  I am happy to walk you through it and help you assess your organization’s needs.

Call me at 1-888-401-AISN, or email me at:  bill.peters@aisn.net.  Or, simply leave a comment below.  Good luck!

What Is Microsoft Office 365? What Are the Benefits and Drawbacks of SharePoint Online? (Part 2 of 2)

January 12th, 2012
Posted by: admin

By Laurie Head
AIS Network Vice President

To review:  In June 2011, Microsoft released Office 365, which is essentially bundled online software hosted in the cloud. Office 365 replaced Microsoft’s Business Productivity Online Services (BPOS) and bundles together the latest upgrades of its SharePoint, Exchange and Lync Server solutions.  So, when you hear “SharePoint Online,” that means SharePoint as it is presented in Office 365, which is hosted by Microsoft. In my last blog, the first part of this series, I explained what Microosft Office 365/SharePoint Online is.  Now, let’s look at the benefits and drawbacks.

Office 365

In today's blog, we look at the benefits and drawbacks of Office 365/SharePoint Online.

Online SharePoint is like a good off-the-rack suit – it does the job if you are a relatively low-level user. However, like a department store suit, it never fits perfectly enough to feel tailor-made.

The features and functionality limitations may be a deal-breaker for some organizations. For example, Office 365 does not allow for full server control and unrestricted access to customize the online SharePoint environment; it also restricts the maximum number of users to 50 and a number of search features are not included. Because online SharePoint cannot be highly customized, some organizations may eschew it for hosted SharePoint Server 2010, which allows for maximum customization. Organizations weighing the two options should study the service descriptions for each product; they will need to compare carefully the online SharePoint to its on-site counterpart.

Nevertheless, a good business case can be made for deploying Office 365. Among the benefits are:

Comprehensive. The bundled services are attractive to many smaller organizations for which customization is of little importance.
Fast. Turn-key configuration and anywhere-access go a long way in the small- to mid-size market.
Less expensive. Maybe, maybe not. However, it does free an organization from the capital outlays associated with on-premise hosting.

Among the drawbacks:

Storage. It’s more expensive per gigabyte.
Service Level Agreement. Microsoft offers a lower SLA than most top-tier hosting companies. They do not guarantee 99.999% uptime.
Comprehensive. An organization may not need or want all of the features offered – or the cost that comes with it.
Features/functionality limitations. In comparing the on-site and online versions of SharePoint, an organization might find that the limitations of the latter are a deal-breaker.
Impersonal hosting relationship. Microsoft is the hosting provider, and it will be challenged to match the rewarding, personalized experience that organizations often have with a smaller hosting provider – one who blends seamlessly into the organization’s own IT staff.
Loss of flexibility and control. An organization can keep its on-premise infrastructure, and using the hybrid capabilities, still deploy Office 365 in the cloud.

However, if you require a high level of control and customization for SharePoint, you would be better served deploying SharePoint Server 2010 in the cloud. If, in future upgrades, Microsoft chooses to match more closely the features and functionality of online SharePoint to its on-site counterpart, namely SharePoint Server, the incentive to move to Microsoft’s cloud may be even stronger for many organizations. In the meantime, third-party hosting of either SharePoint Foundation 2010 or SharePoint Server 2010 may offer an optimal solution.

Are you using Office 365?  What do you think of it?  Check out our white paper for more information.

What Is Microsoft Office 365? What Is SharePoint Online? (Part 1 of 2)

January 11th, 2012
Posted by: admin

By Laurie Head
AIS Network Vice President

In June 2011, Microsoft released Office 365, which is essentially bundled online software hosted in the cloud. Office 365 replaced Microsoft’s Business Productivity Online Services (BPOS) and bundles together the latest upgrades of its SharePoint, Exchange and Lync Server solutions.  So, when you hear “SharePoint Online,” that means SharePoint as it is presented in Office 365, which is hosted by Microsoft.

Office 365

You'll find SharePoint Online in Office 365. But, will it meet your needs adequately?

The convenient, pay-as-you-grow subscription plan to Office 365 requires that an organization pay Microsoft for only what it uses – per user, per month. The net benefit to an organization’s IT team is that it is relatively turn-key and requires far less administration than an on-premises deployment of the identical suite of applications. Organizations may find comfort in Microsoft’s guaranteed high availability and recoverability and its back-end administration, all of which are backed by a Service Level Agreement.

When evaluating an Office 365 deployment, organizations should be asking four key questions:

• Is Microsoft offering a better value? How much would it cost to run these same solutions on-premise?

• Do we need all of these products?

• Are the limitations of Office 365 a deal-breaker for us or our customers?

• Are my mission-critical applications going to be safe? What security assurances is Microsoft providing?

Office 365 Plans

Office 365 comes in two sizes – one for small businesses and professionals (referred to as Plan P) and one for medium-sized enterprises (referred to as Plans E1, E2, E3, and E4).

Microsoft designed Plan P for smaller organizations, ranging from 1 to 25 employees, with a cost of $6 per user per month. For somewhat larger enterprises, the more flexible series of “E” plans (“E” stands for enterprise) ranges from $10 to $27 dollars per user per month.   Plan P and the four Plan Es are not exclusive to the company size for which they were designed, so a small business could opt for a version of Plan E.

The Office 365 Plan P, according to Microsoft, “brings together online versions of the best business-grade communications and collaboration tools from Microsoft, plus Microsoft Office Web Apps, at a price that small businesses can afford.”  In our recent white paper, “To Cloud or Not to Cloud:  SharePoint 2010 Hosting Options…and Which One Is Right for You,” you will find a chart outlining what each plan does. 

Plan P highlights include:

• Email, calendar, contacts, personal archive, and 25 GB mailbox storage with 25 MB attachments using Exchange Online

• Support for workgroups of up to 50 people

• Online document viewing and basic editing capabilities using Office Web Apps

• Easy access to files from a mobile device using Office Web Apps

• Consistent file formatting from desktop Office to Web versions with Office Web Apps

• Sites to share documents and information with SharePoint Online

• Capability to design/ maintain a professional, public Web site with SharePoint Online

• Instant messaging, presence, online meetings, and PC-to-PC audio/video calls with Lync Online

• Ability to share a desktop with colleagues and partners using Lync Online

• Premium antivirus and anti-spam filtering with Microsoft Forefront Online Protection for Exchange

Plan P’s SharePoint emphasizes sharing content rather than collaborative content creation. Collaboration on creating and editing documents with Office Web Apps is “basic.” Plan P assumes that, unlike larger companies, small organizations are less likely to require robust collaboration.

The convenient, pay-as-you-grow subscription plan to Office 365 requires that an organization pay Microsoft for only what it uses – per user, per month. The net benefit to an organization’s IT team is that it is relatively turn-key and requires far less administration than an on-premises deployment of the identical suite of applications. Organizations may find comfort in Microsoft’s guaranteed high availability and recoverability and its back-end administration, all of which are backed by a Service Level Agreement.

Plan E Series

If Plan P feels somewhat light, an organization might consider Microsoft’s Plan E series. Office 365 for medium-sized enterprises is presented in four plans, each with access to some level of SharePoint. Not all four plans come with the same level of SharePoint or other features.  Choosing the optimal plan depends on three questions:

• How much are we willing to spend?

• How much SharePoint do we need and what customization is required?

• What other benefits of Office 365 do we need?

All four “E” series plans feature SharePoint’s ability to access information and documents, however advanced content creation and publishing only come with plans E3 and E4. So, to derive the full benefit of SharePoint through Office 365, an organization must choose either E3 or E4 at a cost of $20 or $27 per user, respectively.

Any thoughts yet?  What is your organization doing?

Come back to this site for Part II, the Benefits and Drawbacks of Office 365. ” Also, you can download our whitepaper about Office 365 vs. on-premise hosting.

 

 

Setting Performance and Latency Expectations for International Hosted SharePoint Deployments

January 5th, 2012
Posted by: admin

SharePoint Latency

GUEST BLOG

By Michael V. Velotta
Founder, Intelishift Technologies

Last month, a prospective client asked a very good question related to the performance of his hosted SharePoint deployment.

The hosted SharePoint environment that he currently has deployed across North America, Western Europe and India is very slow.  Latency is an issue – 20 seconds to upload a file.  He wanted to know how he can minimize latency with a hosted SharePoint solution.  In short, he was concerned about performance.

Latency between Washington and Western Europe ranges between 80 milliseconds (ms) and 140 ms, depending on the country and the carriers within the country.  From Western Europe to Chicago, I’ll add 25 ms to that number.

Latency between Washington and India is 250 ms to 280 ms.  The wildcard here, however, is inside India.  India is heavily oversubscribed and a bad carrier could skyrocket the latency to north of 500 ms.  We’ve had a little more success from Fremont (CA) to India and can get the latency down to 200 ms; then we have the in-country latency issue again.

The holy grail (this is what large SharePoint shops do) is to have SharePoint servers at a datacenter “near” their offices: one in Washington, one in India and maybe one in Greece.  Then the SharePoint servers can sync up behind the scenes (or nightly).  The user’s latency problem goes away and the SharePoint servers are left to keep in sync without impacting the user’s experience.

What is your experience with this?  I’d be interested in your comments.

Michael V. Velotta is a technologist and entrepreneur.  He is the founder of Intelishift Technologies, a strategic data center solutions consultant for a diverse set of clients, including high-end technology firms, Fortune 500 companies, non-profits and government agencies.

Financial Services Firms Like SharePoint 2010

December 27th, 2011
Posted by: admin

By Laurie Head
AIS Network Vice President

We’ve blogged about CPAs and the cloud and how IT literacy is important within the financial services sector, but we haven’t really addressed the fact that MOST of our financial services clients are using our SSAE 16 Type II-compliant hosted SharePoint 2010.  Why?   Quite simply, hosted SharePoint improves information access, saving time and money.

Financial services firms manage mounds of burdensome paper daily – application forms, contracts, client correspondence, regulatory and compliance reports.  If the information flow isn’t managed with precision, the result will be unwieldy, unreliable processes that increase operational costs such as employee overhead, paper file storage fees and information retrieval.  Failing to manage all of this information (especially in a time of unprecedented economic challenges) puts financial services firms at risk. In the face of market turbulence, economic uncertainty, increased competition, data security concerns, and more stringent regulatory and compliance issues, the firms that succeed are the ones embracing the hosted Microsoft SharePoint 2010 platform.  Among many benefits, hosted SharePoint 2010:

  • Provides robust data protection
  • Offers high platform availability
  • Optimizes workflows
  • Automates processes, saves time
  • Centralizes and organizes client data for search
  • Reduces time spent on documentation
  • Manages compliance efforts

With hosted Microsoft SharePoint 2010, smart financial services firms can overcome technical and procedural challenges to master information governance now and gain a competitive advantage in the marketplace—all without sacrificing compliance, security or attention to detail in handling customer data and sensitive information.  Check out our page dedicated to SharePoint 2010 for the Financial Services Industry and let me know what you think.

 

Tribute: Remembering Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Randall L. Ford

December 20th, 2011
Posted by: admin

Randall Ford

Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Randall Leon Ford, 1938-2011

By Jay Atkinson
AIS Network CEO

This week, we remember Randall Ford, who succumbed to a lengthy battle with cancer on Sunday.  He believed in the AISN mission and was instrumental in this phase of its growth.  But most importantly, he was an encourager, a mentor, and a friend.

Randall Leon Ford was born in Marmaduke, Arkansas, on December 15, 1938, a son of Roy Ford and Rosie Foster Ford.  He graduated from Pocahontas High School in 1956. He attended Arkansas State University and graduated from University of Mississippi; later, he was commissioned as 2nd Lt. in the U.S. Army in 1961. He returned to Arkansas State University and received a Masters in History while on active duty in 1972.

Randall retired in May 1986 after 24 years of active service – including a tour in Germany, two tours in Vietnam, a tour at NATO Land South in Turkey, and service at several posts in the Military District of Washington.  In 1989, he co-founded StarTech, a security company in Washington, DC, where he continued to work until he sold the company in 2005.  He is survived by his devoted wife, Ann, two sons and a grandson – and innumerable people whom he touched throughout his life.

Web Design and Development: Best Practices in Production, Staging and Development for Web-Based Companies

December 12th, 2011
Posted by: admin

GUEST BLOG

By Gaige B. Paulsen
Board of Advisors, AIS Network

For companies that primarily do business through their public-facing Internet site, best practices for production, staging and development are imperative.  For any Web-based business, whether e-commerce or presence-based, it is essential that content and systems be updated to remain competitive, which means change and that means risk.

Web-based businesses wrestle with complexity on a daily basis.  Typically, there are multiple developers involved, different development timelines, and numerous components being built simultaneously, tiered systems to synchronize for updates, etc.  One misstep in the development and deployment cycle has the potential to cost the business millions of dollars.

In my various capacities, I have spent years refining best practices for production, staging and development environments.  Normal best practices these days are for the following:

  • A serious version control system (VCS) or distributed version control system (DVCS).  Depending on the architecture, I’m still using   Perforce, which is expensive, but über-reliable.  Many folks like GIT, Subversion, and Mercurial.
  • Serious issue management to track platform development and bug fixes/handle actionable team communication, etc. I recommend   JIRA.
  • Development environments that run on developers’ personal machines in a sandbox or VM, or if substantially small in terms of the number of processes, just in the OS (if they’re running desktop/laptop Linux).   Development environments should be a little version of production.
  • New development that is branched in the VCS and not let into the mainline branch until complete.   Branches can be team-centered or developer-centered depending on how many developers are working on the particular piece of code.   But a modern VCS makes it easy to branch early and merge back in only when development is complete.
  • Staging is essential and should be gate-kept.  Development should be promoted to staging through the VCS.   This way, the act of promotion provides a dry-run for the move from stage to production.
  • Scripted tests for Web-based platforms.   I suggest looking at   Sauce Labs for this, or roll-your-own using   Selenium.
  1. Staging is generally used as a dry run for a move to production and final testing.   Nothing should go to production that doesn’t succeed in stage.
  2. Stage should have a lazy copy of the entire environment if possible (full user base, etc.), but shouldn’t directly touch anything that could cause user confusion (sending email to users, etc.).   It can be quite difficult to get a reliable stage environment set up, especially if you need multiple servers to do it (DB, File, GUI, etc.).   But, the more complex the real environment, the more complex the stage environment and the more important it is to get staging working correctly.
  3. Stage is also where you perform human testing on things that can’t be scripted.   There shouldn’t be need for a lot of this on a Web app, but there are some things that are hard to do in an automated fashion (i.e., does the site look “bad”?).
  • Unit tests for internal functionality need to be baked into the development process.   High-volume organizations tend to make automated running of the 3 major test types (integration, unit, and scripted GUI). As a safeguard, a trigger in the check-in process is important so that code that violates testing cannot be checked into the code base at all and instead remains on the developer’s machine.
  • If you can do it, Continuous Integration is a boon to keep things from getting too far afield.  Code compilations, environment synchronization, and spawning automated testing when checks occur are all great tools and can be done very inexpensively with   Jenkins.
  • Work on production is considered to be a complete fail.   The only reason to do it is catastrophic failure of something that does not happen in the stage and development environments and is a sign that the stage is an inadequate representation of production.   Usually, this would only be to change configuration parameters.
  1. If production breaks roll back to the previous version of the site.   If that fails, then you have no choice but to work on production.
  2. Note that even for catastrophic situations, changing code directly on the production servers is just as likely to make things worse if they haven’t passed the rest of the testing in stage.
  • You can do a lot of debugging on the production site, where debugging is gathering information about something that isn’t working correctly.   You shouldn’t, however, use the production site as a test bed or development environment.
  • If your tests don’t do things that you wouldn’t want done in the production environment (adding and removing users and files, changing parameters, simulating failures, etc.), then you don’t have sufficiently detailed tests.

This is the tip of the iceberg, but before anybody tells you that these methods are too overbearing for a small team, I would suggest that’s a short-sighted view.

At my company, we practice this in a team of small developers for mobile, desktop, and Web apps.   The result is that, in over two years, we have not suffered data loss or corruption in the Web site, which handles our registration, e-commerce, etc. Additionally, we have caught many things that would have been problematic for users if they’d been released.  Similarly, regression testing in mobile and desktop apps had kept us from releasing versions of the software that don’t work on all of the supported platforms and has saved us a lot of customer difficulties.

I hope this is helpful, and I invite you to comment.  Good luck.

Gaige B. Paulsen is a technologist and entrepreneur.  He is currently founder and president of ClueTrust, makers of Cartographica and CartoMobile, Geospatial products for MacOS X and iOS.