I'm liking Serge's blog. (Pending on my list is to do an updated blog roll to all the people I'm reading.)
Serge brings an excellent point on CMDB integration -- standards are missing. And no market really grows without standards.
There is a need for a “next generation CMDB” for the following reasons:
- BPM based on a SOA architecture invoque IT components (software on hardware…) and we should have a link between a Business Process and the underlying Cis. A CMDB should also be process based.
- Relation is important that’s for sure but dependencies is another key topic. How does infratructure relates one to the other, how information relates one to the other, how physically components relates one to the other, how does application code relates (Cendura acquired by CA is maybe one of the only company which deleivred that capability) etc… A CMDB should be also able to add dependencies on the top of relationships.
This initiative will help the concept of federated CMDB and information exchange but will not really look at today’s requirements… A unified Meta model could be an interesting initiative for these vendors as this would create a new generation of unified Service management/Business Process management solutions.
I totally agree it's about relationships. And I will add one more thing. VALUE and RISK will come from the undiscovered and unknown relationships.
Link: Serge Thorn's IT Blog.
Comments