Port activations, server start ups, employee movement

Discuss and debate ITIL Change Management issues
Post Reply
User avatar
Scooter
Itiler
Itiler
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 8:00 pm

Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:57 am

Do server switch port activations fall under network change management?

The customer is requesting a port activation … does this require a change record?


User avatar
Diarmid
ITIL Expert
ITIL Expert
Posts: 1894
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:00 pm
Location: Helensburgh

Sat Oct 15, 2011 3:01 pm

What constitutes a change is entirely dependent on what you want to control as a change.

The best way to decide is to ask:

Will the change have the possibility of affecting a service?

Will the act of performing the change have the possibility of affecting a service?

Are these possibilities sufficiently significant (both in terms of probability and in terms of possible impact) to justify trying to do it right first time?

If something goes wrong, will it matter?

Is it important to know that the change has taken place?


It is very hard to make a universal rule as to what is and is not worth managing as a change because something of seeming insignificance to one organization can be of critical importance to another.
"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
User avatar
Bluesman
Itiler
Itiler
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:00 pm

Tue Oct 25, 2011 5:01 am

In my book, yes - most certainly! It´s a permanent change, there are risks and it needs to be documented for the present and the future.

Next time you swap infrastructure bits (or network guys), no one will know that (or WHY) this port has been opened for some application to work properly, and on whose behalf.

So..treat it as a normal RFC, with all necessary background provided.
---------------- bragging line -----------------
V2 Combined Practitioner (service support)
Problem Mgr
User avatar
mcpang
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:00 pm

Fri Nov 09, 2012 4:41 pm

Diarmid you are spot on. That would have to be the most accurate description of how the technician needs to relate. This is the problem with ITIL in a nutshell. The technician has the insight to how big of a change to the current configuration and a given impact should anything go wrong. This can never be guaranteed through a change process. Bluesman´s approach stalls service delivery and customers do not have the patience to wait 2 weeks for a simple port activation. Under any circumstances the business has to trust a technician to implement the change and here the same issues apply. A lot of the process owners who have never worked with IT tend to think its just the push of a button and then again they do not trust one to do that. The decision should always be the technicians - he is the one with the many years of experience and education behind him in IT systems.
User avatar
Diarmid
ITIL Expert
ITIL Expert
Posts: 1894
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:00 pm
Location: Helensburgh

Sun Nov 11, 2012 6:41 am

I have never been so totally misunderstood in my life.

There is no reason a change should take a fortnight. Technicians rarely have the insight as to the possible consequences of a change. It is the organization, not the techies that has to make the decision.
"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
User avatar
mcpang
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:00 pm

Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:56 pm

Maybe I misread you but from the companies I´ve worked with a change has to be approved on a CAB meeting. These aren´t held every day. Meaning the change builder (technician) also has to keep track of these in an ITSM tool over time. And what if the CAB didn´t get to it, then wait untill next!
Have you ever worked as a technician? My guess is no but I can be wrong. But the only thing I´ve experienced in regards to a wish to control down to the smallest configuration change is a deduction in the will between departments to help each other, more overhead, longer deliveries etc. The only thing a change does is steal the time the technician to actually operate the systems and keep up-2-date with now knowledge. But it do create redundant jobs ;) I guarantee configurations are edited or made without a formal change if the technician finds it unnecessary. Only the technician can answer the questions you wrote!
As long as configurations are backed-up Scooters task would be solved as a SR only.
User avatar
Diarmid
ITIL Expert
ITIL Expert
Posts: 1894
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:00 pm
Location: Helensburgh

Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:43 am

It doesn't need a CAB if it is a so-called standard change. A change management system has to be fit for purpose including how long it takes to approve a change,

A techie will not often know the business consequences of a failed change.

I worked a techie and as a technical manager for nearly 30 years.

As I said, some organizations will find a particular kind of change more important than others; so there is not a simple answer.

If you, as an organization can see no adverse consequences to a switch port activation, then you should document that fact and document who is authorised to approve the change and how it is to be done and when it can be safely done.

If you do not do things formally, how can you for instance be sure that the back-up has been done. If you do not have a change record how do you know what your configuration is and when it was changed to its current state.
"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
Post Reply