Ask the Expert: Live Chat | Assets and Models and CIs, Oh My!

[ServiceNow]

Original Air Date: Thursday, July 9, 2015 | 10:00 AM (PDT) | 1:00PM (EDT)

Do you struggle with the difference between Assets and Configuration Items? And why do we need Model records? Isn't that just another thing to maintain? Get a better understanding of these items, how they are different, and how they work together in this session with Ben Sweetser.

Ben Sweetser is a ServiceNow "old timer" with experience on the full platform with focus on Asset and Configuration Management and Automation, such as Orchestration and Discovery.

[Community Alums]

Hi David,

I would not track these items as business services. Business services should be logical representations of a service provided.

Ben

[genesislv]

Hi Ben, bsweetser

Very informative video... I have two questions about CI's and their lifecyle.

Scenario #1:

I have a CI record for a domain controller windows server. The name is DC12R2. It is attached to an asset, a Dell Poweredge R720. When I replace the asset, the Dell Poweredge R720 to newer server, how would I update the CI record? The new server will retain the same host name DC12R2.

• Do I just update the asset in the CI record to reflect the new server and retire the Dell Poweredge R720 asset.
• Do I just create a totally new CI with the same name but assign it to the new asset? And then set the original CI to non-operational or deprecated operation status?
• Create a totally new CI record with the name of DC12R2-VM and assign the new asset.

Scenario #2:

Similar to scenario #1, a CI record, DC12R2… however, the host name will change, it will be DC12R2-VM.

• Do I just update the original record, DC12R2 and change the name to DC12R2-VM
• Create a totally new CI record with the name of DC12R2-VM and assign the new asset.

Hope you can provide an answer on how I would update the CI information.

Thanks,

-Genesis

[Community Alums]

Hi Genesis,

Am I correct in understanding the first scenario to be replacement with physical hardware and the second to be virtual? If so...

The approach is the similar for these:

• The original Asset goes through the decommission process (possibly with retirement if you aren't going to repurpose the hardware). Because the CI is kept in sync with the Asset, it is also retired as part of this process. The initiation of this process may depend on the timing of the setup of the new CI.
• With a physical replacement, you go through the processes to procure and provision the new hardware. An Asset is created as part of the process, as is its corresponding CI. You could update this new CI with the name or just allow your discovery source to update it.
• If you replace with virtual, then you have a new CI with the new name. Again, your discovery source should capture the details of this new CI.

Because these are new items, tasks are tracked against a new CI, even if it serves the same logical purpose.

I hope this helps.

Ben

[genesislv]

It does help... So to my understanding CIs should never be renamed and reused when there is a change of asset. If a new asset is introduced weather it's being replaced with another physical device or turned into a virtual then a new CI should be created along with it.

Thanks,

-Genesis

[Chad27]

Hey Ben,

To your point above, how should we handle this process when a hardware asset is respurposed? Our thinking is this:

1. Asset and CI are linked - contracts and purchasing information are tied to the asset.

2. We decide we want to repurpose the asset (for example from a Linux server, to inventory, then deployed once again as a Windows server)

3. The physical asset is still the same but we have a completely new CI.

4. Ideally we would break the link between the CI and the asset, send the CI through our decom process and retire it. While the asset would be relinked to the New windows CI found by discovery.

I realize the system doesn't allow us to do things this way. Do you have any suggestions on how we should handle this? We want to keep the asset alive when it is repurposed (considering it has all the cost and contract information attached) while attaching the new CI to the asset.

Thanks for the help.