Status for Decommission versus Retire

klf1123
Kilo Sage

When running through the decommission process for infrastructure hardware. What are the steps for status? If there is a change to decommission a server. It gets marked retired on the CI side but then also on the asset side, shouldn't it only be retired if no longer with the company? How does it get back to "In Stock - pending disposal" on the CI side for Change request? Seems Decommission should be a status somewhere and not necessarily marked 

3 REPLIES 3

The Machine
Kilo Sage

Theres a module for Asset-CI Hardware status mapping.  It looks like you can map different CI status to the Hardware Status.  So if the CI is retired, it looks like you can put the hardware status into a Decom state.  Heres a screenshot of an example.

TheMachine_0-1708114647749.png

 

Thanks, I am familiar with the synch table. However, out of the box synch is retired/ retired. And there seems not to be a status for decommission per se so what is the best practice for "Decommission" operationally versus "Retire" and disposed of. If there is a change request and the CI gets marked "Retired" because operationally "decomissioned" but not necessarily "Retired" on asset side from a physical sense of the asset. 

I disagree with what Time Machine above is showing because that mismatch in hardware status doesn't explain the nuances of retirement within the asset lifecycle.  Specifically "Install Status" (CI) and "State" (Asset) when logically synched keep 29 fields in accurate synchronized alignment.  For retirement, the Retire - Retire synch will allow for asset to display as many substates as you would like while still synching the CI as retired.  If the operation of the asset showing the CI record is heading towards retirement, whether disposed or re-imaged or harvested for its sw licenses prior to disposal, you can allow for that variation on the asset record.  See my comments below from another post on this very topic.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From common sense, non-ITAM perspective, it would seem counterintuitive to have multiple substates of a state that is "Retired".  But when you break down the Disposal process into multiple workflows that are not necessarily in a logical order, the substate themselves become very important to track the final disposal of an asset from when you are first removing it from being "In Use".

 

One such example, you have provided, is the harvesting of software licenses from machines that are going into Retired and are not going back out to being re-"In Use" because either their lifecycle has ended from a manufacturer perspective (EOL/EOS) or the firm has decided not to use that make/model any longer.  In this example, you want the software harvested off the drive before destruction. 

You can go with Retired-Pending Disposal or create a specific substate (always create substates {within reason}, never states - that will keep workflow, business rules and sanity to the instance).  So the In Use device can state change to Retired-Pending SW Harvest (the new substate) and then a team could remove the software licenses based on a whitelist of costly or any cost software determined by the SAM Manager.  The final task would be to change the state-substate from Retired-Pending SW Harvest to Pending Disposal.  Then once the disposal company disposed of the systems and sends the updated file with the certificate, you can import those records which can change the state to Retired-Disposed. 

So, in that example, 3 Retired substates track 3 different workflow tasks/activities while maintaining overall governance of the drive, specifically, the drive's data, which is why all this matters in the end.