"I am sure the HSC has vendor supported equipment that will be part of
UFAD. Will you be requiring these vendors to purchase External
Connector licenses for the UFAD DC's to they can login?"
That would be part of costing out the service in our existing model.
However, we'd do it by User CALs, as it would be more cost efficient
with the counts we have. That model would not be portable to your unit
at all. Management alone would be cost prohibitive.
I'd prefer that everyone who had a active UFID/GatorLink ID be included
in the Campus Agreement. That would make Administration and Cost
Modeling very easy across the board. Further, it would eliminate all
the barriers posed in this thread and negate the cost of Connector
License throughout the UF Enterprise for all products. I think the cost
calculations would reflect this as the best overall strategy when you
take administration, manpower, additional service licenses, etc. into
account.
I still am resigned to believe that we can reach a good model for the
UF Enterprise with some strong senior leadership support. Sound
business alignment requires commitment.
-Dick
Dick
____________________________________
Dick Deason
ITCenter, HSC
Assistant Director
Systems Administration
[log in to unmask]
352-273-5033 (work)
____________________________________
>>> "Hughes, Chris" <[log in to unmask]> 06/07 9:34 AM >>>
In our organization we have cooperative agreements in counties and
have
approximately 800 county paid employees that perform UF business. In
effect, these are UF employees, they just do not receive a paycheck
from
UF. They are not consultants making a profit from UF, they are
supporting UF's land grant mission of extension throughout the state.
The legislature has decided that these support personnel are county
paid
employees, while the faculty they support are UF employees.
We also have ~4000 volunteers annually who are "Master Gardeners in
IFAS. These people work on a volunteer basis and use UF equipment and
email to perform these tasks. I know other units on campus also have
volunteers, such as the library. Again, these are employees of UF,
they just do not happen to get a paycheck so they were excluded from
the
Campus Agreement.
Another good example would be a unit that might hire work through
ManPower when they need emergency secretarial staff. These people are
not covered under the current agreement, because they are not UF pain
employees, they are technically consultants. Should ManPower be
forced
to pay for external connectors and Office Licenses for their machines
to
do their job?
I am sure the HSC has vendor supported equipment that will be part of
UFAD. Will you be requiring these vendors to purchase External
Connector licenses for the UFAD DC's to they can login?
Who will do the management to ensure that UF does not purchase
duplicates for all of these extra licenses that are needed?
If these people who are doing UF work are not included in the Campus
Agreement, someone would be responsible for significant expenses with
external connector licenses for the domain controllers they
authenticate, which could be nearly any DC in UFAD. Do we really
expect
these volunteers to may thousands of dollars to provide this support?
What I feel should have happened is when UF determined the count of
who
should have been included in the Campus Agreement, they should have
counted the number of people that do UF work, rather then just taking
a
shortcut and using payroll records. Unfortunately, these contract
discussions were not very public and the UF communication did not have
the opportunity to provide much input. Mike Conlon believes this was
a
choice, but not a mistake. I believe it is a mistake because it
causes
a large number if people who work for UF to be out of license
compliance. The process to get them into compliance is extremely
expensive, unless they are included in the license count next year
when
we renew the license contract.
What I want to ensure is that this choice, or mistake, depending upon
your opinion, is not made when it is time to renew the license. I
want
to ensure that everyone who is doing UF work in included in the count
of
employees. I also want to make sure the license terms are clearly
defined, by Microsoft, so IFAS is not relying on incorrect information
relayed by the UF administration that cause IFAS significant extra
work
and expense.
Chris Hughes
-----Original Message-----
From: Active Directory issues at UF [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Dick Deason
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 9:03 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ACTIVEDIR-L] Who uses UFAD and/or Exchange,but is not a
paidemployee at UF
Chris,
Your business operations are quite a bit different that we would
experience. How many External Users are we talking about in your
organization?
For our purposes, with the consultant populations, with hourly billing
rates from $135-$235/hr, I think it should be obvious who should be
paying for these Non-UFSelect Agreement Licenses. The Unit benefits
from their service, and the consultant populations benefit from our
services. In my outside consulting efforts, I've had no problem
paying
support fees and software license cost that allow me to generate
revenue.
I think everyone is starting to understand that without sound business
practices, an Education Institution cannot function at peak
effectiveness. From our viewpoint, if a Unit needs services, we
discover, plan and align the service to their exact needs, allowing us
to closely assess the true cost of the service. Should that cost be
acceptable to the unit, we add it as a line item into the budget, and
simply build the service. At that level, it's Business Decision, not
an
IT Decision.
I'm sure if the business needs of IFAS require these external users to
be made part of the UF Licensing Agreement, our leadership can cost
out
the requirements to make an accurate and portable business model for
the
future. Who pays for those cost? ... That's a Business Decision for
University Leadership. We just provide the options.
Dick
____________________________________
Dick Deason
ITCenter, HSC
Assistant Director
Systems Administration
[log in to unmask]
352-273-5033 (work)
____________________________________
>>> "Hughes, Chris" <[log in to unmask]> 06/07 7:36 AM >>>
Why should people who receive a paycheck from UF be treated any
differently then people who are performing UF work? This is a
constant
point of annoyance in IFAS, where our county employees are considered
half citizens by UF. For your permanent consultants, are you ordering
licenses from the UF Select agreement? This is not allowed, as only
academic employees can get licenses from this agreement. As for
external connectors, who will purchase the external connections for
the
UF Domain Controllers (currently over 50) at $583.68 per server. This
would also be required for each file server they may access. Exchange
is even worse, with external connectors running $15,609.60.
Sharepoint
- that will run you $9365.76. Does UF have these external connector
licenses for their servers?
Unless I was mistaken, last year the license costs were distributed
not
based on user count, but the overall costs was distributed between
units
based on their previous year's expenditures. IMO UF should include
all
UF workers in their license count, not just the paid employees.
As for the student portion, I have not heard much recently, though I
know Dr. Hoit was recently made aware and may be working on a
solution.
MS has given us until January to get it resolved.
Chris Hughes
-----Original Message-----
From: Active Directory issues at UF [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Dick Deason
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 5:43 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ACTIVEDIR-L] Who uses UFAD and/or Exchange,but is not a
paid employee at UF
I think if they fall outside the boundaries of receiving a Pay Check,
their Departmental/Unit Sponsor should pick up the tab. We have a few
units with permanent consultants that we've nurtured into this
paradigm.
It simple for me, tell the Unit Business manager how much it cost, and
let them figure out if that is worth the utility they receive. As
cheap
as CALs are, I think it's an easy Line Item in the master budget for
the
Department/Unit.
I'll simply price out an External Connector for that same
service/user,
and determine which cost you'll need to pass on for that line item.
I though the SGA was going to push a tax through to purchase the
Student CALs? Did that fall through?
Dick
____________________________________
Dick Deason
ITCenter, HSC
Assistant Director
Systems Administration
[log in to unmask]
352-273-5033 (work)
____________________________________
>>> "Hughes, Chris" <[log in to unmask]> 6/6/2005 18:15:59 >>>
IFAS has many people who use UFAD who are not paid employee's at UF.
These include emeritus and courtesy faculty, departmental associates,
volunteers, consultants, and county employees. At this time, we are
excluding students from our list, as Microsoft has given us a grace
period until January of next year. These people are not currently
licenses to use UFAD, because only people who received a UF paycheck
have Windows and/or Exchange CALs. What other units have people who
are
using, or might be using UFAD who have not received an official UF
Paycheck? This is independent of what computer that they use. The
Microsoft contract does not have restrictions on the computers used,
only the person who is using the computer.
What have other units done to try and determine how to get these users
licenses, since they are not eligible under the UF Select Agreement.
I
know at the Warrington College of Business we used External Connectors
on some servers, but in the UFAD environment this would be cost
prohibitive because of the large number of servers.
Has anyone else had contact with Mike Conlon to determine how exactly
all of these people should be covered and how to prevent duplicate
licensing? Is Mike Conlon still the official contact for Microsoft
Licensing at UF?
Thanks,
Chris Hughes
IFAS IT
|
