Page 1 of 1

Software/Application CIs

Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:29 am
by paulfixter
I have had a discussion with a colleague regarding software/application CIs.

One person believes that a CD/disk/tape etc (with software on it) is a physical CI - this may be stored in a secure fireproof safe when not in use; software on a shared drive that does not exist on a CD/disk/tape is a logical CI.

The other person believes that ALL software CIs are logical, regardless of whether it is on a CD and stored in a safe, or on a server.

I can see both arguments.

Who is right (if anyone)?

Many thanks
Paul

Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:40 am
by mnsmith
They are both right because the definition of a CI is open to interpretation by your company. What you need to look at is, does is really matter that one is logical and the other physical? Do you need to manage a CD separately to a copy on disk?

I have the concept of a software CI, which has two attributes (amongst others), the physical location of the CD (if one exists) and the virtual location on disk. This is the right answer for me but not necessarily for anyone else.

Hope that helps

Mick

Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:46 am
by paulfixter
Thanks for the reply Mick.

Yes, I think it does matter to us that one is physical and one is logical, as we have a number for firesafes throughout our organisation where the contents need to be tracked.

Furthermore, the "logical" CIs on a server need to be tracked also.

We would need to differentiate between the two types.

All the best
Paul
mnsmith wrote:They are both right because the definition of a CI is open to interpretation by your company. What you need to look at is, does is really matter that one is logical and the other physical? Do you need to manage a CD separately to a copy on disk?

I have the concept of a software CI, which has two attributes (amongst others), the physical location of the CD (if one exists) and the virtual location on disk. This is the right answer for me but not necessarily for anyone else.

Hope that helps

Mick

Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:54 am
by UKVIKING
All

This is the scenario
If you have a DVD / CD set for Microsoft Office 2003.
You will have a license key for either a single install or if you have group license.

You copy the DVD onto an install server so that you dont lug (and lose0 the DVDs

You have 2 CIs here

1 - physical
1 - logical / virtual

The logical / virtual is the dependent (child) CI of the physical

and any installation on any desktop is a child CI of the virtual / logical CI

The desktop installations of logical is the operational version of the Office 2003 application suite

I would be classifying the physical and virtual as MEDIA
I would classify the installed application as Application use (Licensed)

So that if you want to know how many licenses are used, go by the Application Use (licensed)

The core objective of the CMDB and its CIs is the purpose of the data and what you can glean from it

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 5:07 am
by Diarmid
ssosham77,

1. That has already been said.
2. The person that said it explained why they thought so.
3. without reasons you are not contributing to the discussion - your vote is not required.
4. no urls allowed on this site.
5. are you by any chance advertising a product?
6. either contribute or go away.

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 1:23 pm
by ITILadmin
Just another troll link-spammer: now deleted.

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 1:28 pm
by Diarmid
I knew that really. I just felt like being abusive today.

Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:30 am
by ITILadmin
They deserve all the abuse.... and more. :twisted:

Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:29 am
by markhayes
Hello, like it has been said before nearly anything can be a CI. I find it useful though to think of what change management there would be around it and whether it is required. If the answer is no then it doesnt need to be a CI. This might be a simplistic view of things but it depends on the maturity of your process and tool in our case here it's not quite there buit we are trying to manage these 'low level' CIs and it is creating more confusion than control.

hope this helps!

Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 2:09 am
by Stefan77
Hello all,

I'll borrow this thread for some questions regarding applications CIs...

I'm fairly new to the Configuration Management field, and would like your opinions on Application Packaging.
Should this service be defined as an attribute in the application CI (i.e. f. ex "Packaging type: opt1, opt2, opt3") , or should packaged applications be defined as a new application CI-type?.
My heart tells me that the first options seems to make most sense.

Naturally the Packaging Type-attribute should then function as a ruler to point out the owner/responsible of the CI;
If the application is packaged (as MSI, or via Citrix or whatever distribution method that is used), the owner/responsible should be Application Packaging.
If not, then the owner/responsible should be another team or group within the SW organization.

What's your take on this?

Cheers, and Best Regards,
Stefan

Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 3:43 am
by UKVIKING
Stefan

The ITIL Forum Answer is......

IT Depends

What is the purpose of tracking the CI ithis way ? Is this required for some sort of reporting information or ....

that should always be the concern