Search
Topics
  Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Modules
· Home
· Content
· FAQ
· Feedback
· Forums
· Search
· Statistics
· Surveys
· Top
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your_Account

Current Membership

Latest: Pm7knsrn2k
New Today: 23
New Yesterday: 56
Overall: 146001

People Online:
Visitors: 54
Members: 1
Total: 55 .

Languages
Select Interface Language:


Major ITIL Portals
For general information and resources, ITIL and ITSM World is the most well known for both ITIL and ITIL Books. A shorter snapshot approach can be found at ITIL Zone

Related Resources
Service related resources
Service Level Agreement
Outsourcing

Note: ITIL is a registered trademark of OGC. This portal is totally independent and is in no way related to them. See our Feedback Page for more information.


The Itil Community Forum: Forums

ITIL :: View topic - RFC for Training facility
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

RFC for Training facility

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> Change Management
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
asrilrm
Senior Itiler


Joined: Oct 07, 2007
Posts: 441
Location: Jakarta, INA

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 1:19 am    Post subject: RFC for Training facility Reply with quote

Folks,

I need your inputs.
My company has just got a request to facilitate training from one of our customer. So we've set a room with 10 PCs with connections to servers and mainframe, and connection service will run during every training sessions. After the training, they get disconnected and idle until another session takes place.

My question is: is it necessary to raise RFC before a training session runs for the connection, and another RFC after the training for the disconnection?

Thanks in advance
Asril
Back to top
View user's profile
Ed
Senior Itiler


Joined: Feb 28, 2006
Posts: 411
Location: Coventry, England

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Asril

Forgive my ignorance - when you talk about running a 'connection service', I presume you mean a script to open & close particular ports?

If so, once that script was in and accepted, then it becomes BAU. As such I would expect to either cover this in one RFC, or cover it under a Standard Change. If the implementer wanted to raise separate Changes, I would try and dissuade them, purely to save unneccesary duplication!
_________________
Regards

Ed
Back to top
View user's profile
asrilrm
Senior Itiler


Joined: Oct 07, 2007
Posts: 441
Location: Jakarta, INA

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Ed

The PCs are functioning as workstations with access to many systems, depending on the particular training requirement.
Yes, connection service means opening and closing ports.
In terms of software it would also mean preserving additional connection licenses.
Oh well, as I list what needed to be done for training preparation, I become closer to the conclusion that RFCs for this purpose are necessary

I like your suggestion of a Standard Change.
Since I'm not familiar with this kind of service, I would take more time to see how it goes before deciding if it could be covered by Standard Change.

Thanks for your suggestion Ed.

Regards,
Asril
Back to top
View user's profile
Diarmid
Senior Itiler


Joined: Mar 04, 2008
Posts: 1884
Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi asrilrm,

my tuppence worth.

You set up two tasks (work instructions/job packets whatever you call them), one to make the connections and one to disable them. Within the tasks you define any actions required to ensure their success and maintain the integrity of your network and services, this will cover the requirements of Change Management at the point of service delivery.

You do all the testing and get all the approvals before first use, including any constraints of timing (e.g. need x notice, can't initiate during maintenance period). This will cover the more strategic aspects of Change Management.

Now you have the capability of delivering temporary service on request to meet customer requirements.

If your CMDB needs to have status information on any connected items then your tasks will have defined how to keep this up-to-date. Change Management will be effected, but not invoked for individual sessions. The tasks will also notify everyone who needs to know about the temporary connections (e.g. so that they do not get treated as anomalous by over-zealous guardians of the network).

If you have identified risks or this is a long term commitment then you institute periodic service review to make sure everything is as it should be.
_________________
"Method goes far to prevent trouble in business: for it makes the task easy, hinders confusion, saves abundance of time, and instructs those that have business depending, both what to do and what to hope."
William Penn 1644-1718
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Diarmid
Senior Itiler


Joined: Mar 04, 2008
Posts: 1884
Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi asrilrm,

my last post was delayed an hour by my poor connection.

The problem with using a RFC each time is that you need a longer notice period and even then you (at least theoretically) could get a rejection. Whereas, if you have a defined service then other RFCs will be forced to accommodate the requirements, even though the instances are not fully specified.
_________________
"Method goes far to prevent trouble in business: for it makes the task easy, hinders confusion, saves abundance of time, and instructs those that have business depending, both what to do and what to hope."
William Penn 1644-1718
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
asrilrm
Senior Itiler


Joined: Oct 07, 2007
Posts: 441
Location: Jakarta, INA

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 6:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Diarmid,

If I understand correctly, the CM process cycle will go for the first time,
then after successful testings and other tasks, it could be shifted as a service request.
That would be a great idea, thanks.

I can understand your concern of the possibility of the RFC getting rejected but as Ed said, maybe it could be covered as a standard change.

One thing that I'm concern about is should I consider a trainee pressing the wrong key (and thus causes significant impact) into a risk?
I forgot to inform that the training is kind of live training (OJT)

Regards,
Asril
Back to top
View user's profile
Diarmid
Senior Itiler


Joined: Mar 04, 2008
Posts: 1884
Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi asrilrm

asrilrm wrote:

One thing that I'm concern about is should I consider a trainee pressing the wrong key (and thus causes significant impact) into a risk?
I forgot to inform that the training is kind of live training (OJT)


Are you saying the trainees will have access to live services in ways that can affect them? Then you probably need storm warnings, active monitoring and rapid regression paths. Very serious risk analysis and management required before committing to this.
_________________
"Method goes far to prevent trouble in business: for it makes the task easy, hinders confusion, saves abundance of time, and instructs those that have business depending, both what to do and what to hope."
William Penn 1644-1718
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
kinger
Itiler


Joined: May 08, 2008
Posts: 39
Location: South West

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Diarmid wrote:
Hi asrilrm

asrilrm wrote:

One thing that I'm concern about is should I consider a trainee pressing the wrong key (and thus causes significant impact) into a risk?
I forgot to inform that the training is kind of live training (OJT)


Are you saying the trainees will have access to live services in ways that can affect them? Then you probably need storm warnings, active monitoring and rapid regression paths. Very serious risk analysis and management required before committing to this.


What he said, yes to a risk assessment, and other tasks to mitigate the risk of users having access to the live system, no to a change request (other than the initial one to consider training room live).
Back to top
View user's profile MSN Messenger
asrilrm
Senior Itiler


Joined: Oct 07, 2007
Posts: 441
Location: Jakarta, INA

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Folks,

Thanks so much for your inputs, they mean alot to me
I guess I'm facing danger ahead.
Ok, give me time to think the best way to deal with this.
I definitely must meet top management with these issues
Technical people usually have nasty yet genius ideas

Regards,
Asril
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> Change Management All times are GMT + 10 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001 phpBB Group
phpBB port v2.1 based on Tom Nitzschner's phpbb2.0.6 upgraded to phpBB 2.0.4 standalone was developed and tested by:
ArtificialIntel, ChatServ, mikem,
sixonetonoffun and Paul Laudanski (aka Zhen-Xjell).

Version 2.1 by Nuke Cops 2003 http://www.nukecops.com

Forums ©

 

Logos/trademarks property of respective owner. Comments property of poster. Rest 2004 Itil Community for Service Management & Foundation Certification. SV
Site source copyright (c)2003, and is Free Software under the GNU / GPL licence. All Rights Are Reserved.