Free Sample: Linux Strategy Outline
As mentioned in Free Sample: Open Source Strategy Outline Linux is a key component of your company’s open source strategy.
Having a formal Linux Strategy can help you educate non tech business leaders, calm their concerns, and provide a framework that shows if, when, how, and where Linux makes sense in the enterprise. Even if you don’t have Linux deployed, it is a big enough hot topic that you will eventually be asked about it. Having a strategy document that explains why you do not use Linux shows you have researched and thought about the issue.
Below is a sample of an outline I have used successfully for Linux strategy documents. Fill in details of you company and situation and enjoy! Note: places to insert information are denoted by curly braces {}.
I. Scope
a. This document is specifically a Linux Strategy, this discussion should concentrate on how, where, and why Linux is deployed in the Enterprise b. The scope of this strategy only applies to use in the {insert company name} IT Enterprise – i.e. pros and cons would be different for a vendor planning to sell softwareII. Linux Background and Overview
a. Linux was originally developed and released in 1991 by Linus Torvalds who wanted a free Unix operating system b. Linux (Linus’ Unix) was originally and still is released under GPL licensing terms and Torvalds still oversees kernel development c. There are now many distributions of Linux including Redhat, Suse, Debian, and Slackware to name a few that all share the same kernel base d. Of these vendors Redhat and Suse offer their own versions of commercial Linux software aimed at the enterprise server marketIII. Current {company} Linux Implementations
a. Run on Sun and Compaq hardware b. Used for Sendmail relays c. Used as web server hosts d. Used as platform for MySql for {} applicationsIV. Linux Technical Benefits
a. Hardware Independence – Linux can be run on many different hardware platforms including Intel (Compaq/Dell), AMD (Compaq/Sun), and Sparc (Sun) which are currently deployed in the {} Enterprise b. Linux can combine a Unix operating system and the CPU clock speeds of Intel/AMD processors – This provides a high performance platform for applications whose usage patterns are a large number of small integer based transactions. c. Filesystem – Has several free choices in journaling filesystems d. Software – There is a large number of software applications that run on Linux including many administration toolsV. Linux Non-Technical Benefits
a. Cost – Linux is available for free and also available in low cost enterprise software bundles b. Hardware Independence – Being able to choose the hardware platform (Compaq, Dell, Sun) provides leverage to {} when dealing with hardware vendors and flexibility in hardware reuse c. Business Software – Many freely available software applications geared for business use are available for Linux to compete with commercial software packages including BEA, Websphere, Oracle, and Microsoft. Also, many of the large commercial software vendors now have Linux editions of their software d. Administration Tools – Current administration tools used by {} Unix Administrators can be used to manage Linux servers at no additional costsVI. Linux Drawbacks
a. Intellectual Property – There have been IP concerns over Linux. Commercial vendors such as Redhat now provide software assurance programs to protect against concerns b. Security – Malicious hackers have access to the same source as those with good intentions c. Interoperability – Proprietary commercial software vendors could make it difficult with interface them without purchasing their softwareVII. Where Linux Makes Sense
a. Linux makes sense to deploy for applications whose operating characteristics are mainly composed of a high number of small integer based transactions. Examples would be:VIII. Deployment Criteriai. Web Servers ii. Application Servers iii. Mail Relays iv. LDAP v. Firewalls vi. DNS vii. Lower End Databasesb. Linux also makes sense to deploy as the underlying platform for Open Source applications to fully realize Open Source cost savings
a. Linux has been evaluated to ensure that it meets the below minimum requirements to deploy into a production environmentIX. Linux Strategyi. Supported by current fault management tool ii. Supported by current performance metric tools iii. Portscan detection security tool available iv. File integrety checker available v. Automated system build capable vi. Volume Management software available vii. Journaling Filesystem available viii. SSH Support ix. Supported backup client available x. Remote administration
a. Linux should be regarded as a choice for an operating environment when it makes sense in greenfield applications and enhancements to existing applications b. Linux should be deployed as the base operating environment to support other Open Source applications to fully realize cost savings of Open Source c. Deploy Linux in web, application, and network services to give management comfort level before moving to larger database space d. Continue down {} path by phased migration of JBoss applications to internal Linux cluster e. Utilize “Incident Packs” for Linux software supportX. Linux Support Strategy
a. Linux should be deployed as another Unix operating environment to include the following:i. Standard initial configuration ii. Remote fault monitoring iii. Performance metricsb. Linux should be managed using existing Unix practices and procedures currently in place
What the fuck is that supposed to mean, security… is a drawback in Linux? Are you fucking kidding? With all that nonsense going on Windows being hacked 1000000 times a day, you’re saying that having the source open in linux is a fucking drawback? GO GET A FUCKING LIFE!
And No freaking intellectual property theft, if anything, the ones who stole anything from one another was Microsoft, it keeps stealing and then making patents claiming it is their invention. Just because Linux community doesn’t have enough money to stand for itself, doesn’t mean it won’t. GPLv3 will fuck microsoft so hard that they will just have to raise the white flag of surrender. When Microsoft said that Linux infringes on so many IP rights, and the linux community asked them to tell us what it infringes on, did Microsoft say what they are? NO, why? They are scared. BIG TIME.
interoperability, lol, here you go, trying to make it even harder on me to comment, nah, I’m just kidding, just look around you, what do you see, do software vendors want to play nice with Linux? No, do Linux developers want to play nice with software vendors? HELL Yeah! That’s why you see so many free software/open source applications trying to inter-operate with other proprietary applications, such as MS Exchange.. There’s tons of apps that try to make it easy for people to use MS Exchange without the need for MS Exchange. How about MS Office, we have Open Office, that can open MS Office documents, piece of cake.
So it turns out that you have no clue what you’re talking about.
this article is retarded (period)
Serge, you make a point - security could be listed as a benefit when compared to Microsoft, etc. However, there are drawbacks to everyone having visibility to your code. Take a buffer overflow attack - If someone has access to code, they can see where there are incorrectly bounded variables, and figure out the correct stack offset to exploit.
On the IP issue: It doesn’t make a difference who is in the right, just who can file / win a lawsuit. The fact that there is a legal conflict means ther e is a potential issue. Corporations tend to be very sensitive to any potential legal issues surrounding software they use.
I think you made my point on interoperability. When one side doesn’t want to play nice with the other, you have interoperability issues. Real interoperability can not be a one way street.