Durham School rolls back ICT

[srochford]

A bit more info on the schools web site Durham Johnston Comprehensive School

 

Oops - giving

"Service Unavailable

 

HTTP Error 503. The service is unavailable."

Not sure if that's from their old kit of the new MSP!

 

No reason why thin clients shouldn't be able to work but it does need well provided central servers. One of the intriguing things with Sharepoint 2010 is that you can do video and photo editing on line in the web apps. I know that's not really thin client but it shows the sort of thing you can do with the processing handled on a central server rather than on the client.

 

Get it all working well and there are potentially huge savings - just look at how many threads here concern imaging desktop machines. Thin clients mean you never have to do that which will save money (but saving money is pointless if the kit doesn't work ...)

 

PS just done a bit more googling - looks like the school only started using the new systems this month. google's cached version of the web site says "The Project Board has decided that due to pressures of time and issues experienced during the migration of the school to the new systems we will be rolling back to the school systems as they were prior to the Easter Break." so it doesn't look like it's been installed and failed after significant use but rather that they've tried to move to a new system, the move has failed and (perfectly reasonably) they've moved back to the system they had a couple of weeks ago. I could be mis-understanding that; it would certainly be good to get more detail but I'm not sure that this is a complete disaster but rather a fairly standard "we think we can change but we have fallback position if it goes wrong"

Edited April 20, 2010 by srochford

[Trust-No-One]

Lets put it this way i wouldn't like to be a student in this college at the moment studying my A levels with the systems going up and down like a well known ladies drawers!

Its a business model with schools tacked onto the end as an after thought.

 

Even though we are led to believe that with the layer 3 technology which is being used the thin client footprint is 35K, what happens to the large file sizes passed over the WAN by up to 30,000 students who log in every hour on the hour and off again surely it must create bottlenecks somewhere.

Add on the staff and it equates in total to approx 40,000 which is a huge number to divide into the bandwidth even when they are putting 2 x 100Mb lines into every school i't just don't add up real time with the large file sizes.

 

Then there is the flash and video which is causing the major problems with heavy 3D applications and video editing software, I would have liked personally to see a centralised VTLE with a single sign on for all users which would have allowed all students and staff the ability from all schools to collaborate and share good practise even in the new schools instead of forcing schools down a one shoe fits all scenario which doesn't allow for innovation unless you pay through the nose for it.

 

Don't get me wrong I am all in favour of new schools but at what cost to the public purse through taxes and for what, so large companies can make profit at the taxpayers expense again.

Mark my words it will all end in tears for some students as their T & L is disrupted for the sake of proving a point.

 

I personally wish that Durham LA would let everyone into the picture as it looks more and more like a vendetta against the Durham schools IT professionals for doing a good job with the limited budgets that they are given.

[PEO]

who manages Druham Johnson IT system?

[localzuk]

Even though we are led to believe that with the layer 3 technology which is being used the thin client footprint is 35K, what happens to the large file sizes passed over the WAN by up to 30,000 students who log in every hour on the hour and off again surely it must create bottlenecks somewhere.

Add on the staff and it equates in total to approx 40,000 which is a huge number to divide into the bandwidth even when they are putting 2 x 100Mb lines into every school i't just don't add up real time with the large file sizes.

 

Large files *aren't* passed over your connection with a VDI/thin client system - they're all on the servers, not the clients. The client footprint will be about 35kbps, as all the user sees is the image of their desktop.

[mounters]

who manages Druham Johnson IT system?

 

LA Managed Service

[broc]

who manages Druham Johnson IT system?

Durham County Council have set up a partnership between the LA who deliver the 'managed service' and Capita who did the design & implementation. Capita are in partnership with Carrillion, part of the Inspired Spaces Consortium. Originally Morse were the ICT provider, then they withdrew and Carrillion IT Services (CITS) were brought in & later CITS were sold to Capita.

[PEO]

hmm Carrillion I've heard nothing but bad things about them. Thank god there not going to be involved in our county BSF

[broc]

hmm Carrillion I've heard nothing but bad things about them. Thank god there not going to be involved in our county BSF

Inspired Spaces were one of three short listed bidders for Durham, two of them withdrew...... leaving one as the only player in town.....

[GoldenWonder]

Although I'm wary of BSF, I'm still genuinely interested in what sort of problems caused them to rollback. I guessed it hasn't got to the point of a complete changeover and they encountered an issue that couldn't be solved quickly enough to avoid disruption.

 

Information about what problem they had would helpful for the rest of us facing BSF style chaneover in the coming years.

[broc]

Although I'm wary of BSF, I'm still genuinely interested in what sort of problems caused them to rollback. I guessed it hasn't got to the point of a complete changeover and they encountered an issue that couldn't be solved quickly enough to avoid disruption.

 

Information about what problem they had would helpful for the rest of us facing BSF style chaneover in the coming years.

I don't think the details behind the decision have been made public; if & when it does I am sure it will find its way onto Edugeek. I am sure many others would like to know too, especially those other schools in the LA that are expecting to implement the same solution in due course.

[AngryITGuy]

Large files *aren't* passed over your connection with a VDI/thin client system - they're all on the servers, not the clients. The client footprint will be about 35kbps, as all the user sees is the image of their desktop.

 

My understanding as I am no expert when it comes to VDI and thin client stuff is that since all the servers are located in a data centre all file transfers should take place there with very little traffic being passed to the client.

 

I've just fired up the VDI solution as I have access to it. In five or so minutes I launched Word, Excel, Google Earth (looked up school postcode) and IE (to check the news). We use NTOP to monitor network usage and the laptop I used to access to the VDI solution had received 28.9MB of data.

 

I made sure nothing else was running in the background, is this normal to have so much data transfer via a thin client solution?

[AngryITGuy]

I don't think the details behind the decision have been made public; if & when it does I am sure it will find its way onto Edugeek. I am sure many others would like to know too, especially those other schools in the LA that are expecting to implement the same solution in due course.

 

To be honest I don't think the real reason will ever be known to the public, there are still many schools in the authority that probably do not want to go down the route of a Managed Service. Giving them the real reasons for the current failure would only give those schools additional ammunition to fight the Managed Service!

 

I could be wrong but the reason on the school website sounds like the "spin doctors" have been working on it ... let's not forget this is the LA beacon school for the BSF Solution which if I recall should have been ready and fully functioning in September.

[mounters]

I don't think the details behind the decision have been made public; if & when it does I am sure it will find its way onto Edugeek. I am sure many others would like to know too, especially those other schools in the LA that are expecting to implement the same solution in due course.

 

The very sketchy details I have learnt so far are that the problems have arisen from the fact that they are using the IT kit from pre bsf due to there not being funding available/left for new IT kit. This equipment apparently couldn't cope and there had been unoffical word that the system was close to collapse for a while (I believe that they have had the legacy and bsf solution runnng in parallel since Jan).

[broc]

To be honest I don't think the real reason will ever be known to the public, there are still many schools in the authority that probably do not want to go down the route of a Managed Service. Giving them the real reasons for the current failure would only give those schools additional ammunition to fight the Managed Service!

 

I could be wrong but the reason on the school website sounds like the "spin doctors" have been working on it ... let's not forget this is the LA beacon school for the BSF Solution which if I recall should have been ready and fully functioning in September.

 

I guess it will depend upon the nature of the reason for delay; if a key piece of technology is not working properly, but in time can be made to work then that is one thing; if they have simply underestimated the amount of time & effort that's another. The worst case (or best case if you are anti-BSF managed service?) scenario would be where architecturally the solution is so badly flawed/underfunded/underspecified that it is never going to work......

 

Hopefully for the schools sake it is not the latter.

[localzuk]

I made sure nothing else was running in the background, is this normal to have so much data transfer via a thin client solution?

 

28.9Megabytes, or 28.9Megabits? (Just to check).

 

Also, if the VDI solution is one which does network booting in the first place, the machine may well have had its mini-os transferred to it when you turned it on also.

[maark]

Common sense to implement major change during summer holidays - would never try this during 2 week easter break.

Also common sense to fully test everything first - but when bsf/contracts/consultants involved common sense does not always apply :-)

[srochford]

Common sense to implement major change during summer holidays - would never try this during 2 week easter break.

Also common sense to fully test everything first - but when bsf/contracts/consultants involved common sense does not always apply :-)

 

Yes, but if you read Edugeek you'll see any number of people on here have carried out just such upgrades this Easter without apparently having tried it first on a test network, without apparently having a fall back plan and have ended up with bits not working! It's not just bsf contractors who seem to lack common sense!

[powdarrmonkey]

Yes, but if you read Edugeek you'll see any number of people on here have carried out just such upgrades this Easter without apparently having tried it first on a test network, without apparently having a fall back plan and have ended up with bits not working! It's not just bsf contractors who seem to lack common sense!

 

That's unfortunately unavoidable in some cases - budget constraints, pressure from above and so on. BSF contractors should have the resources available to do this, however.

[broc]

Yes, but if you read Edugeek you'll see any number of people on here have carried out just such upgrades this Easter without apparently having tried it first on a test network, without apparently having a fall back plan and have ended up with bits not working! It's not just bsf contractors who seem to lack common sense!

 

Sometimes schools have no choice about when they make the move with BSF. The completion date is set during the planning stages & penalties are built into contracts for failure to meet target dates. If for example a consortium has to build a new school, move everything in & then demolish the old school & landscape the site any delay to the move could impact the demolition and landscaping & trigger penalties.

 

So, BSF schools seldom have the luxury of waiting until the summer to move.

 

This is no excuse of course for not testing, and I don't doubt that BSF contractors know they have to test & more importantly they must seek sign-off that the testing has met the agreed criteria.

[Dos_Box]

Following a phone call I had yesterday from a 'concerned' source in County Durham the roll back is due to the VDI slution simply not working as it should for a number of reasons:

 

a. Lack of planning and forethought

b. Network capability

c. A lack of appreciation about getting it to actually work before rolling it out

 

In short, it is not down to any overriding single issue apart from 'It's not working like we thought it would' due to point 'a'. I think many of us have seen this before where a project has been forced through without much actual consultation with schools or an appreciation of the task in hand and bad decision follows bad decision because the few people who say 'hang on, this isn't going to work unless.....' get ignored and treated as idiots.

[AngryITGuy]

The very sketchy details I have learnt so far are that the problems have arisen from the fact that they are using the IT kit from pre bsf due to there not being funding available/left for new IT kit. This equipment apparently couldn't cope and there had been unoffical word that the system was close to collapse for a while (I believe that they have had the legacy and bsf solution runnng in parallel since Jan).

 

I thought the school pre BSF was running a Cisco and Citrix based thin client infrastructure. A similar solution to what BSF are offering you'd think that if it works over a LAN it should work over the WAN asumming the infrastructe is in place to do so.

 

I'm sure my line manager mentioned the information about the schools pre BSF kit as he was impressed by the revelation at a BSF Meeting he attended a couple of years ago.

 

28.9Megabytes, or 28.9Megabits? (Just to check).

 

Also, if the VDI solution is one which does network booting in the first place, the machine may well have had its mini-os transferred to it when you turned it on also.

 

28.9Mega Bytes, if it was a solution that does network booting wouldn't the data transfer occur at the beginning of the sessions?

 

Looking back through the NTOP stats for the device during connectivity it kept getting a stream of data sent to it.

 

Going back to the LA solution for BSF as mentioned on here by many folk it is a good solution in theory I don't actually think the solution it self is flawed at all atleast not the Citrix part.

 

Where the proposed solution fails is with the infrastructure of the WAN, I personally think that this is the weak link in the equation and has been for quite sometime.

[Trust-No-One]

I think many of us have seen this before where a project has been forced through without much actual consultation with schools or an appreciation of the task in hand and bad decision follows bad decision because the few people who say 'hang on, this isn't going to work unless.....' get ignored and treated as idiots.

 

I think this is exactly what is happening here. If it wasn't for networking amongst ourselves, us IT folk in Durham would be completely in the dark about BSF - communication from above about it is VERY lacking.

[torledo]

Following a phone call I had yesterday from a 'concerned' source in County Durham the roll back is due to the VDI slution simply not working as it should for a number of reasons:

 

a. Lack of planning and forethought

b. Network capability

c. A lack of appreciation about getting it to actually work before rolling it out

 

In short, it is not down to any overriding single issue apart from 'It's not working like we thought it would' due to point 'a'. I think many of us have seen this before where a project has been forced through without much actual consultation with schools or an appreciation of the task in hand and bad decision follows bad decision because the few people who say 'hang on, this isn't going to work unless.....' get ignored and treated as idiots.

 

the thing about VDI is even if with the right type of planning, it just isn't a magic bullet. Even with a serious upfront investment.

 

Especially as it's arguably still a version 1.1 technology, with vendors products improving and having features added at a rapid pace.

 

I've been in meetings to discuss VDI and came out with a sense that those who sell the solution want to convince they can overcome obstacles, but how many workarounds do you deploy before it starts to look suspiciously like a FAT-thin hybrid. With an expensive backend infrastructure [storage, virtualization nodes] and when your promising the full desktop experience how many weak links can you tolerate between that virtualized desktop on SAN storage and the user accessing their desktop ?

 

IT's really about being realistic, and weighing up the value of the additional hardware and licensing costs.

[AngryITGuy]

I think this is exactly what is happening here. If it wasn't for networking amongst ourselves, us IT folk in Durham would be completely in the dark about BSF - communication from above about it is VERY lacking.

 

Couldn't agree with you more about that, I will even stick my neck out and say that I think alot of bad decisions have been made by the LA regarding the proposal of the BSF Solution.

 

Correct me if I am wrong but I don't think any schools or school IT staff were consulted when it was decided to go for a VDI solution and I don't think an alternative has ever been put on the table.

 

Testing of the solution was all done behind closed doors with a select few schools invited to see it working, from what I have been told the Proof of Concept was only ever tested on a LAN! My school was actually asked to take part in the testing of the proposed VDI solution to see how it would work over the WAN but that never happened even though I setup half an ICT Suite ready for use.

 

What's even more crazy is that the LA is still signing up schools to the Managed Service even though it hasn't managed to get it working!

 

My meeting with the BSF team is still going ahead today, if anyone in Durham wants to get me to ask some questions on their behalf just PM me and I will do my best to get them answered.

[broc]

... but how many workarounds do you deploy before it starts to look suspiciously like a FAT-thin hybrid. With an expensive backend infrastructure [storage, virtualization nodes] and when your promising the full desktop experience how many weak links can you tolerate between that virtualized desktop on SAN storage and the user accessing their desktop ?

 

 

You haven't seen the Durham solution spec by any chance have you?