Providing a Campus-Wide Software Server Or How To Be All Things to All People! Copyright CAUSE 1994. This paper was presented at the 1994 CAUSE Annual Conference held in Orlando, FL, November 29- December 2, and is part of the conference proceedings published by CAUSE. Permission to copy or disseminate all or part of this material is granted provided that the copies are not made or distributed for commercial advantage, that the CAUSE copyright notice and the title and authors of the publication and its date appear, and that notice is given that copying is by permission of CAUSE, the association for managing and using information resources in higher education. To copy or disseminate otherwise, or to republish in any form, requires written permission from CAUSE. For further information: CAUSE, 4840 Pearl East Circle, Suite 302E, Boulder, CO 80301; 303-449-4430; e-mail info@cause.colorado.edu PROVIDING A CAMPUS-WIDE SOFTWARE SERVER OR HOW TO BE ALL THINGS TO ALL PEOPLE! Richard Grover and L. Dean Conrad Arizona State University Tempe, Arizona ABSTRACT: Distributed computing systems are a reality, but a wealth of computation hardware is useless without software. Managing and funding the software in a distributed environment is a headache! Faculty need access to the instructional software available in the student computing sites to prepare class assignments. Students need access to the same software to complete their class work. The confinement of software to specific devices or locations contradicts the theme of distributed computing. Everyone needs access to current software to ensure compatibility and to reduce the computing support load. Faculty and staff need access to a diverse set of software, but they do not always have the budget to purchase and maintain this software let alone the time to install it and maintain updates. All this argues for the extension of the student site server concept to a campus-wide software server concept. Without something like this, it will be nearly impossible to adequately manage the burgeoning volumes and diversity of software on our campuses. This paper describes the vision, issues, and estimated costs involved in setting up and running such a service. BACKGROUND As the campus computing environment continues to transform itself from centralized to distributed in nature, one of the key leadership challenges that has emerged is determining how to provide software and support in this environment. Traditionally, student computing sites have provided access to computing hardware and software so that students could complete their course work. To make efficient use of the distributed computing resource available to faculty, they need access, either from their offices or from home, to the same software that is installed in the student computing sites. With personal ownership, or distributed computer facilities, students also need access to this software from anywhere on campus or from home. Many of the clientele of the central Information Technology (IT) department have become sophisticated users of technology. They need access to an increasingly diverse array of current software products that are maintained and compatible with one another and with the campus computing environment. The costs associated with providing access to adequate software and supporting it, are substantial and--while budgets have improved over the drastic cuts experienced a few years ago--it is unlikely our institution will be able to afford continued proliferation of the present highly distributed and individualized software purchase and distribution schemes. Furthermore, there are significant management headaches involved with supporting a distributed server environment, e.g., backups, restores, off-hours support, network management, and systems administration. All this takes time and resources away from mission-critical departmental activities. A new kind of centralized management and support scheme is in needed. However, our customers will not return to the old days of their forced dependence on the central IT department. Thus a new synergistic balance between independence and centralized economy-of-scale is also needed. The IT department on our campus already has a significant investment in personal workstation software in the student computing sites and the support infrastructure to install and maintain that software. Like most institutions, we have also deployed a campus-wide network. With the right software management and networking products, this investment can be leveraged to provide a campus-wide software server environment that can make software available to anyone associated with the institution. This technology can also be used to restrict access for a particular set of software to a particular community of interest, such as a single college, department, or class. COMPONENTS OF THE CAMPUS-WIDE SOFTWARE SERVER At Arizona State University (ASU), we have put a lot of time and resources into establishing the new distributed computing environment for faculty, staff, and students. We are in a position to capitalize on this investment by leveraging a number of inter-related technology components to establish the campus-wide software server. Not all of these components are entirely in place, but most are at least partially deployed at present. The components we expect to use are identified below. Distributed computing architecture ASU has established a distributed computing architecture for the campus called ASURITE ("Developing a Distributed Computing Architecture at Arizona State University", __CAUSE/EFFECT__, V.17, No. 2, Summer 1994). This architecture specifies a coherent technology environment in which all the components are compatible with one another. This architecture allows us to focus on a restricted set of platforms--i.e., Windows, Mac, and UNIX Motif--in order to make the most of our limited resources. Adequate personal workstations Part of the ASURITE architectural definition is the general availability of adequate personal workstations on the desktop. A minimum of a 386 PC or a 68030 Mac is required to run the kind of client software needed. At ASU, the Provost, Dr. Milton Glick, has provided significant workstation "infusion" funding over the past couple years which has essentially brought faculty desktop systems up to par; administrative desktops will be a future priority. Universal network connectivity These personal workstations must be connected to the campus network. At ASU, we have deployed a campus-wide Ethernet- TCP/IP network with selected links upgraded to the higher speed FDDI as necessary (and affordable). The same "infusion" funding mentioned above has also allowed a substantial portion of the campus to become networked. Replace LAN 's With a WAN In order to minimize the support overhead associated the campus-wide software server, we are planning replacement of our existing Banyan and AppleTalk LAN's in the student computing sites with a WAN. The Andrew File System (AFS) is part of the ASURITE architectural definition. AFS can be used to replace our existing LAN's with a WAN thus unifying our networking support strategy and simplifying training, documentation, and support for the campus-wide software server. "Dial-up Ethernet" The same functions available on campus must also be available off-campus to foster home access and location independent computing. Clearly, dial-up speeds will restrict some applications with high bandwidth requirements, but most functionality can be provided. We are using the Point-to- Point Protocol (PPP) at ASU to provide this service, although it is restricted to faculty and staff at this time. Software license management Products are now available that will allow better management of site licenses in order to minimize the number required for any given package; to avoid a one license per computer approach. These products keep track of, and limit, concurrent usage of a particular software package to the licensed quantities. These management tools can span the campus network to keep track of software use throughout the institution. Software distribution The old methods of diskette copying and individual computer installation are time consuming and inefficient. We envision hundreds or even thousands of copies of various software products available via the campus-wide software server. To ensure interoperability among software on the same and separate workstations, it is crucial that there be a way to manage versions of software products. There are two software distribution models: the "push" model and the "pull" model. In the push model, software is distributed from the central location through the network as a universal update. Software is "pushed" out to the customer. In the pull model, software is distributed from the central location when requested by the customer. Software is "pulled" out by the customer. ASU is targeting the pull model for our campus-wide software server. CAMPUS-WIDE SOFTWARE SERVER BENEFITS We anticipate realizing a number of benefits from establishing the campus-wide software server at ASU including: Encouraging student micro purchases We will never be able to afford to centrally fund all the micros in the sites students will need. The campus-wide software server will encourage student purchase of micros because they will have access to the software they need from home or any other campus location without expensive purchases or having to wait in line for access to a computer in the student sites. Faculty access to site software Faculty will be able to gain access to the same software used by their students. They will be able to develop class demonstrations and assignments from their office or home without having to physically go to a computing site. Leveraging of software investments The investment in software by IT or other entities will be better utilized for a greater return on investment for the institution. When software is not in use on one computer it is available to use elsewhere. This network access can be restricted; for example, software purchased by an academic unit can be restricted to members of that unit. A greater diversity of software available to the individual Products will be available that individual faculty, staff, or students would never be able to afford by themselves. Lowered overall software costs for the institution Fewer copies of software products will be required since everyone will have ready access to a wide diversity of products in the campus-wide software server. Also, more copies of products will be purchased "in bulk" realizing greater volume discounts and a lower cost per copy. Lowered overall overhead/support costs for the institution Much time will be saved by individual faculty, staff, and associated clerical support in navigating the purchasing bureaucracy. Plus all the time required to install and maintain those purchased packages will be saved. Location independence Software will now be available from anywhere rather than being restricted to a particular device, room, or LAN. This reduces unnecessary travel, provides personal convenience, and makes better use of hardware. You don't need to go to the location with the "right" software but can work from any location with adequate computation capabilities and network access. Improved support for the campus computing architecture Software product and/or version mismatches are a major headache in maintaining a reliable, responsive campus distributed computing environment. The central IT staff can ensure the products and versions available via the campus- wide software server do indeed work together and are ASURITE compatible. STRATEGIES FOR THE CAMPUS-WIDE SOFTWARE SERVER We have been seeking a unified distribution and license management mechanism. Our investigations indicate that we will likely have to settle for a suite of products, as there does not appear to be a "one-size-fits-all" solution for our three platforms (Windows, Mac, and UNIX Motif). Many of the leading contenders address one aspect, distribution or license management, but not both. Our unified file system, AFS, promises to simplify the distribution issue; however, further development is needed. While we expect greater efficiency of investment for the university as a whole, a unified licensing effort requires concentration of money into a common fund. We are now managing software across several IT computing sites as a single resource. If we are to transition this IT site resource to a campus resource, we estimate that approximately 1000 additional Windows clients and roughly 500 additional Mac clients will be needed. Extrapolating from our site software licenses, the additional costs could be $250K+ for an initial purchase, with $65K+/year in additional maintenance and upgrade charges. Additional servers will be needed, with an estimated initial cost of $100K and an increase of $10K/year to our maintenance expenses. We have not yet settled on a funding strategy. Will the additional budget be provided centrally or do we need to sell "subscriptions" to the service in order to fund it? We are planning a two phase pilot. The first phase is already underway and involves opening the software to a relatively small academic unit, the College of Architecture & Environmental Design (CAED). Macintosh products are available (pull model) to all associated with CAED. This first phase is intended to let us discover technical and administrative issues associated with managing a campus-wide software server. In the second phase, we intend to broaden the scope to include PC products as well as Mac products and involve a broader base of students and faculty. This phase of the pilot is expected to cost ~$25K and is targeted to begin spring semester '95. We will need to do a Request For Proposal (RFP) for products that can support the software license management and distribution functions. We have identified the following requirements for the RFP: * support WINDOWS/Mac/UNIX Motif clients; * support access that is customer location independent; * provide usage statistics by application and platform to help track usage and predict the need for additional licenses; * provide the capability to restrict access to software based on rules (e.g., restrict software usage to certain departments or colleges) * provide the capability for central and distributed management (license administration); * support the Kerberos standard for authentication; * be compatible with AFS; * support version control for software distribution; and * provide software distribution functions. IMPLEMENTATION OF A VIRTUAL SOFTWARE LIBRARY AT ASU Earlier LAN-based software management included software distribution and license control functions, but only within the LAN. With the interconnection of several student computing site LANs into the campus network, we began looking for management mechanisms that could span the campus network. The first package we implemented that could do this was KeyServer, from Sassafras Software, which was implemented to provide the license management along with AppleShare file servers that provided software distribution. A KeyAccess client is installed as an extension to the Macintosh operating system. Software is keyed so that it invokes the KeyAccess client during software launch. The KeyAccess agent contacts the KeyServer to register the launch of the software. As implemented, KeyServer uses AppleTalk protocols for communication between client and server. The license limits are coded in the KeyServer. When all licensed copies are in use, a launch attempt is denied and the person is given the option of waiting in a queue for one of the current users to close the application. With KeyServer controlling simultaneous launches, it is easy to prove license compliance to software vendors. Keyed software is open to copying from the file server to the local hard disk, but the keyed version of the software cannot launch without KeyServer authorization, so the software is useless off the network. Software control is no longer dependent on restricting distribution, but rather on the active monitoring of simultaneous use. KeyServer has been running as the software control for the Macintosh systems in the IT sites for over a year now. The distribution of software is still through AppleShare file servers, although we are experimenting with AFS. The software is now managed as a single resource independent of specific locations. A limited license can now be served to any Mac participating in the KeyServer/KeyAccess launch control mechanism. A student can compute at whatever location is convenient, with access to the same suite of software. KeyServer can also use TCP/IP instead of AppleTalk, which is in keeping with our strategic direction as defined in ASURITE; however, we have not yet shifted to TCP/IP. Sassafras Software has just released a DOS client, thus we are planning to implement KeyServer as the launch control for our PC's as well as our Macs. THE PHASE ONE PILOT The College of Architecture & Environmental Design has about 1000 students total, which constitutes a little over 2% of the total student body of ASU. CAED has a relatively large installed base of Macintosh computers among students, staff and faculty (for its size). Some key pieces of graphical software are licensed by IT in quantities capable of supporting CAED's needs but were previously only available by traveling to one of the IT sites. With the implementation of KeyServer, CAED purchased a license for the KeyAccess client for its Macs, and is now running software on its Macs from the IT licenses within the same launch control that serves the IT sites. CAED also has an inventory of limited copies of specialized software of particular interest to the design disciplines. This software is also controlled through the central KeyServer. CAED owned software is no longer available on the limited number of machines that have the few copies of specialized software. Rather, it is accessible to all Macs through the network from a file server. Launch denials are tabulated and used as justification for the expense of limited budget resources on expansion of licenses for those software in highest demand. The additional usage from CAED has stayed within the existing licenses of IT, demonstrating the ability of the campus-wide software server to make fuller use of software within its license limits. The performance of KeyServer has proven adequate for the larger audience in this initial pilot. We have experienced minor problems with launch approval due to network performance caused by systems other than KeyServer, but the network load of KeyServer activity is negligible. CHALLENGES There are still some significant hurdles to overcome in providing a fully configured software server to the ASU community. One is the lack of a PC AFS client which will perform adequately. We deployed AFS as a replacement for our Banyan LAN's in the student computing sites at the beginning of fall semester 1994, but had to go back to Banyan because of sever performance problems with the NFS/AFS translators we were using to bridge the NFS clients on the PC's to AFS. We had similar, problems on the Macintosh computers. We attempted to use an AppleTalk/AFS translator in servers so that the Macintosh clients could use the built-in features of the Mac OS to connect to the AFS servers. Performance limitations have put this strategy on hold. Restricted budget flexibility for this fiscal year may delay the second phase of the pilot. CONCLUSION Distributed computing environments have the potential to create provincialism in the management of software, leading to redundancy of effort, duplication of licenses, limited utility of scare resources, and general inefficiencies in the acquisition and management of software. However, the interconnectivity of the distributed environment coupled with network distribution and control of software promises to overcome the downside of the distributed computing environment for software availability. We are convinced the campus-wide software server is an idea whose time has come. There simply does not appear to be another viable alternative to manage the burgeoning demand for software on campus. With this concept, software will be recognized as a strategic resource in the distributed computing environment of ASU. In a sense, the distributed computing environment coupled with the campus-wide software server gives units the freedom to do their own thing where appropriate, but to rely on the central organization for those needs held in common with the rest of campus. And allow IT to (finally) be all things to all people! ABOUT THE AUTHORS Mr. Richard Grover is a Support Systems Analyst Principle with Computing & Network Consulting Services at Arizona State University. He has been involved in the support of microcomputer facilities at ASU for 10 years and is presently supporting the College of Architecture & Environmental Design. He had several years of computer experience with geographic information systems and graphics prior to joining the staff at ASU. He has Bachelor of Landscape Architecture from Utah State University and a Master of Landscape Architecture from Harvard Graduate School of Design. He may be reached by phone at 602-965-5654, and by email at Richard.Grover@ASU.EDU. Mr. Conrad is Director of Computing and Network Consulting Services for Arizona State University with management experience in a variety of technical and applications support roles in both the public and private sectors. He has written and presented on various distributed computing policy, organizational, and technical issues over the past four years. Conrad holds an M.S. degrees in Computer Science from Arizona State University. He may be contacted at (602)965- 5620 or via electronic mail at Larry.Conrad@ASU.EDU. November 8, 1994 (LDC)