1. AeRO IT User Support Project Developing a connected support community National Ticket Exchange and Incident Management Findings Hamish Holewa, IT User Support Project Manager Lennie Au, University of Melbourne ITS Project Manager Ursula Soulsby – Senior Business Analyst

2. Drivers Help research user support national-wide Improve overall incident management Provide a robust effective service support framework Improve the understanding of service interdependencies

3. Scope Explore the needs for an Exchange Ticketing Solutions Capture and model the initial requirements Provide guidance on national-wide Users Support Model and Processes

4. Methodology Identify key stakeholders and major infrastructure operators Develop questions to support qualitative interview Feedback Analysis

5. Current State of User Support Varies – Good practices, dedicated support staff to email lists or nothing at all Depends – Operational maturity of Infrastructure Operators state – Number of services Ticket exchange system = Must crawl – then walk – then run

6. Potential roll out process Engage Infrastructure Operators Register Services / Adopt AeRO Tick for Services Subscribe to the AeRO Ticket Exchange

7. What could a National Ticket Exchange and Incident Management Platform look like? Communication Method. Principles Agreement Simple hub Ticket Queue for Services/ Infrastructure Operators Integrated Ticket Queue/ Knowledge Base and Help Desk Centre Crawl Walk Run

8. Crawl – Possible principles Provide information as specified in AeRO ticket accreditation (Catalogue, Service/ Incident Manger contact details) Develop and update a Knowledge Base to provide self-help Take ownership of an incident in scope of your service and notify other services of discovered incidents Provide good practice service support to researchers Commit to continuous improvement

9. Walk – Simple Ticket Exchange Hub Hub.aero.edu.au  Hub based Ticket Exchange System  Incident that affects services outside own Infrastructure is submitted to the hub  All members get notified and are able to resolve  Interoperability managed through email tickets IO E IO D IO C IO A IO B IM 1. IO E – Incident with service operated by IO C. Send to Hub 2. IO C – Incident resolved. Ticket finalised. 3. IO E – Notified IM is resolved. 4. IO A,B,C,D,E – Notified IM is resolved.

10. Run – Advance Ticket Exchange Switch  Switch based Ticket Exchange System  Incidents can be categorised by  Services (replication, LiveArk, Infrastructure Operators etc)  Type (security, performance, capacity storage, compute)  Member wide notifications  Service Level Objectives  Advanced ownership and management of tickets based upon categorisation  Members can utilise Ticket Exchange as own platform  Ability to on-board other services  Additional access to Institutional Service Desks

11. AeRO Tick – Obligations to Entry Lifts Tier 0 User support for Infrastructure Operators Provides a framework to explore User Support Options Provides a method of communication for Infrastructure Operators to categorize issues Establishment of Ticket Exchange Hub Complements existing systems. Does not need to replace current ticket or support systems Standard language and framework to respond to cross node incidents Raise awareness and responsibility for cross-node incidents Establishment of a National Help Centre Satisfaction rating Service Level Objectives and reporting Quality Assurance Appropriate Tier 0 feedback mechanisms Infrastructure Operator Benefits Better User Support Increase confidence in eResearch Services

12. “Incidents get resolved pretty quickly when people are motivated. The AeRO Tick Framework provides an entry to that (sic) and some accountability around National Services” Infrastructure Operator – Ticket Exchange Participant