CSG UCLA Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

Information Technology Services

CSG

UCLA Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

May 28, 2013

-The UCLA Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) is an application middleware solution 

designed to provide a robust, scalable and adaptable campus information 

integration hub

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

UCLA Ent

er

prise

Ser

vice Bus

(ESB)

UCLA ODS

Dimensional

Data

Warehouse

UCLA Business

Applications

UCLA Business

Applications

This hub provides a common platform to 

securely and efficiently route, transform and 

deliver information flowing across UCLA’s 

information systems

A common hub vastly improves UCLA’s ability 

to monitor and manage information 

processing across the university

Routing services through a service bus also 

enables more gradual systems evolution by 

encouraging adoption a standard, modular 

and loosely coupled systems integration 

strategy

An early iteration of the service bus is being 

deployed to support data integration 

requirements for the UC Path project

Information Technology Services

3

•

Legacy data exchange across a broad spectrum of UCLA  

information systems has evolved organically over the 

past 40 years

•

Interfaces are generally developed to solve specific 

needs and designed to exchange information two 

systems at a time

•

While the approach is expedient and effective on a 

smaller scale, it becomes problematic as the number 

of systems grow

•

As point‐to‐point connections increase, it becomes 

increasingly costly to manage the tangled web of data 

loading/transfer processes

•

As business processes and systems evolve, managing 

changes to the data transfer processes become major 

projects in and of themselves

•

Current data processes are also largely built around 

daily or weekly batch updates and lack the 

infrastructure to support real‐time data exchange

Point‐to‐point data exchange is difficult to 

manage at scale and change over time

Current State of UCLA Data Exchange

Oracle Ser

vice Bus

UCLA ODS

Dimensional

Data

Warehouse

UCLA Business

Application

Interface

Files

UC Path

Files

UCLA Business

Application

UCLA Business

Application

UCLA Business

Application

File

Transform

File

Transform

File

Transform

UCLA Business

Application

File

Transform

50+ outbound

(from UC Path)

20+ inbound

(to UC Path)

200+ tier 2 interface

•

Original Oracle approach 

was to capture as‐is state

and build replacement 

interfaces

•

A large number of tier 1 

interfaces would be 

required, many of them 

independently developed 

and maintained legacy 

connections

•

Implementation would 

mean conversion work at 

each end point with little 

progress toward better 

management of enterprise 

information flow

Information Technology Services

1. All information routes through ESB –

single point of data transformation /

orchestration

2. Integrate Managed FTP with ESB to

handle batch data transfer

3. Use ODS as UCLA’s UCPath staging data

store

4. Expose all real time interfaces, including

IDM interfaces, via ESB

5. All batch interfaces, including ODS data,

flow through ESB; minimize redundant

batch tier 1 interfaces

6. Whenever possible, meet campus

applications’ need for UCPath data by

deploying ODS-querying service

components

7. Allow database pull from ODS to support

legacy tier 2 interfaces

8. Transform data in Data Warehouse to

support analytical reporting

UCLA Information Hub

UCLA Information Hub

UCLA Enterprise Service Bus



Security



Workflow



Routing



Transform



Enrichment



Queuing



Orchestrate



Monitoring



Transport

Managed

Secured

FTP

UCLA ODS

UCLA Data

Warehouse

Identity

Management

(IAMUCLA)

Applications

“Tier 1” Applications

2

2

1

1

3

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

5

5

7

7

Applications

“Tier 1” Applications

Applications

“Tier 1” Applications

Applications

“Tier 2” Applications

5

5

6

6

6

6

8

8

6

6

Real time data interfaces Tier 1 batch data interfaces ODS driven data interfaces * Arrow indicates direction of data flow

Inf

ormatica

UC Path

5

UCLA Enterprise Service Bus Funding Estimate

•

Phase I:  Develop the ESB 

architecture, infrastructure and 

basic hosting services

•

Phase II:  Deploy the ESB for 

UCPath and subsequently for:

•

PAMS (Research Administration 

Post Audit Management System)

•

IAMUCLA (Identity and Access 

Management)

•

BruinBill (Student Consolidated Bill)

•

Integrated Web Experience (Student 

Web Applications)

•

OPUS (Faculty Information System)

•

Financial System Replacement 

•

Other enterprise solutions

Phase I Cost

Funding 

Source

FY12‐13

FY13‐14

FY14‐15

On‐Going 

Funding

Hardware / Infrastructure

UCPath

$54,840

ESB Software Support

UCPath

$20,000

ESB Technical Training

UCPath

$30,000

Consulting Services

UCPath

$15,000

Staffing

IAMUCLA

$230,500

Total Phase I

$350,340

Phase II Cost

Funding 

Source

FY12‐13

FY13‐14

FY14‐15

On‐Going 

Funding

Hardware / Infrastructure

TBD

$112,970

$127,657

$127,657

ESB Software Support

TBD

$40,000

$40,000

$40,000

ESB Management Tooling

TBD

$40,000

$40,000

$40,000

ESB Technical Training

TBD

$30,000

$0

$0

Consulting Services

TBD

$15,000

$15,000

$15,000

Staffing

UCPath

$317,211

$0

$0

Staffing

TBD

$457,110

$855,920

$855,920

Total Phase I

$1,012,291

$1,078,577

$1,078,577

Funding Source

FY12‐13

FY13‐14

FY14‐15

Three Year 

Funding

IAMUCLA

$230,500

$230,500

UCPath

$119,840

$317,211

$437,051

TBD

$695,080

$1,078,577

$1,773,657

Three Year Funding

$350,340

$1,012,291

$1,078,577

$2,441,208

Information Technology Services

UCLA Enterprise Service Bus Funding Principles

7

Consideration

Rationale



Critical to business and 

operational needs

•

Enterprise integration standards will enable real‐time information flow to support 

business process improvements and real‐time execution; constraints of the current batch 

oriented legacy applications will be eliminated over time

•

A modern and coherent information delivery solutions for service integration, data 

provisioning, reporting and enterprise analytics will speed web‐based system 

development and help improve organizational agility



Economies of scale / cost 

savings

•

The ESB will provide a more cost efficient way to manage, integrate, transform and route 

information flowing between UCLA administrative system using a common solution than if 

many disparate approaches are used

•

Future enterprise systems will be deployed with consideration for longer‐term evolution 

rather than tactical, uncoordinated approaches that are difficult to maintain, hard to 

change and costly to support



Network effects

•

The Enterprise Service Bus is common infrastructure that derives most of its value from 

ubiquitous adoption, similar to UCLA’s Single Sign‐On service

•

The advantages of a common integration architecture

UCLA Enterprise Service Bus Funding Principles

Consideration

Rationale



Mandatory for enterprise 

systems

•

Establishing standard governance, architecture, infrastructure and support for an 

enterprise integration strategy will provide a foundation for enabling real‐time, modular 

and efficient information exchange for future enterprise systems

•

Departments will also benefit from a standards based method, tools and services for 

accessing and consuming enterprise data

•

Exceptions to standard enterprise integration solutions can be proposed; requests for 

exceptions will be reviewed and approved based on their merits

•

Adoption of the ESB for non‐enterprise integration requirements is encouraged but not 

mandated



Central funding

•

Initial development and deployment of the ESB are funded by the UCLA UCPath Project

•

Ongoing support, maintenance and enhancement of the ESB should be centrally funded to 

encourage widespread adoption and avoid a complex allocation or tracking of middleware 

usage that would be associated with a fee‐for‐use approach

•

Conversion of larger application systems to leverage the ESB should be funded through 

central and/or department projects; support for ESB adoption by small departments 

should be provided the by centrally funded support team

•

The ESB meets the high bar for a mandatory, centrally funded solution

FORM A: UCLA IT Investment Request Form (FY 2012-2013)

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

Project Name: System:

Project Sponsor(s): Project Owner(s):

Project Manager(s): Prepared by:

Date: 1. Project Profile / Background

1a) Describe the overall objective and importance of this project.

1b) Is this project related or dependent on any other project or recent request?

X Yes (Please specify) No

1c) Describe the proposed project management structure

1d) What type of project is this? 1e) When will this project be fully implemented?

X Implementation of new technology system Less than one year

Implementation of emerging technology system Between one to two years

Replacement of legacy system X Between two to five years

Other: More than five years

2. Key Stakeholders

2a) List the major stakeholders of this project and the importance of this project to each.

2b) Does the project have the full support of key stakeholders? If so, who are they? If not, please explain.

X Yes

No (Please explain)

The UCLA Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) is an application middleware solution designed to provide a robust, scalable and adaptable campus information integration hub. A common hub vastly improves UCLA's ability to monitor and manage information processing across the university. Routing services through a service bus also enables more gradual systems evolution by encouraging applications to enforce a standard, modular and loosely coupled systems integration strategy.

Users, system owners and application developers of UCLA administrative, faculty and student systems (e.g., UCPath, PAMS IAMUCLA, BruinBill, IWE, Opus, Financial System replacement, etc.) will benefit from a more modern integration architecture, accelerated system development cycles and business process improvements resulting from real-time data exchange.

The project has consulted members of all the above stakeholder groups. UCPath and IAMUCLA have also funded part of the project and are fully onboard with the benefits of a common ESB infrastructure.

Dattathreya Sharma, Program Manager; Albert Wu, Senior Director Information Management Services; and Anet Avanessian, Senior Director Application Services

Dattathreya Sharma

The program management team will provide operational leadership and coordinate with other related campus initiatives. The team consists of Dattathreya Sharma, Program Manager; Albert Wu, Senior Director of Information Management Services; and Anet Avanessian, Senior Director of Application Services. In addition, we will create a functional oversight group representing the broader campus for guidance and direction. The project team will provide regular status updates to the program management team and the executive sponsors. The program management team will review major changes in scope, schedule or assumptions with key stakeholders.

An early iteration of the service bus is being deployed to support data integration requirements for the UCPath project.

May 28, 2013 Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

Administrative VC Jack Powazek and Associate VC Andrew Wissmiller. ITS ESB

FORM A: UCLA IT Investment Request Form (FY 2012-2013)

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

3. Project Costs / Funding Request

3a) Prior Funding: Have you requested funding for this project and/or system before? If so from whom, when and for what purpose? X Yes (Please specify)

No

3b) Summary of Estimated Costs: The following data is derived from the attached Financial Worksheet (Form C).

Permanent

Main Categories: FY 12-13 FY 13-14 FY 14-15 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 Total FY xx-xx

1 Infrastructure $ 54,840 $ 112,970 $ 127,657 $ - $ - $ 295,467 $ 127,657 2 Software Support $ 20,000 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ - $ - $ 100,000 $ 40,000 3 Software Tools $ - $ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ - $ - $ 80,000 $ 40,000 4 Technical Training $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 60,000 $ -5 Consulting Services $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ - $ - $ 45,000 $ 15,000 6 0 $ 230,500 $ 774,322 $ 855,920 $ - $ - $ 1,860,742 $ 855,920 7 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -8 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -9 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -10 0 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $

-Total Project Costs $ 350,340 $ 1,012,292 $ 1,078,577 $ - $ - $ 2,441,209 $ 1,078,577 Less: Funding Offsets $ 350,340 $ 317,211 $ - $ - $ - $ 667,551 27% $ - 0% Remaining Balance $ - $ 695,081 $ 1,078,577 $ - $ - $ 1,773,658 73% $ 1,078,577 ####

3c) Request for Chancellor's Funds: $ - $ 695,081 $ 1,078,577 $ - $ - $ 1,773,658 $ 1,078,577

3d) Use of Requested Chancellorial Funds: Explain what the Chancellor's funds will be used for.

ESB development and maintenance costs including hardware, infrastructure support, software support, management tools, technical training, consulting services, development and support staff.

Development & Maintenance (One-Time / Temporary) Costs

UCPath is funding the initial development phase as one time investment. This funding includes hardware, infrastructure services, software support, technical training, consulting and staffing for a program manager and architect for one year.

FORM B: UCLA IT Investment Request Rating & Justification Form (FY 2012-13)

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

1) Strategic Impact:

1a) Describe the impact this project will have on the overall campus strategic initiative and/or the institutional mission of teaching, research or public service:

1b) Does this project align with any UC, State-wide or National initiative?

X

Yes (Please explain)

No

1c) Check the appropriate box.

1. None - No strategic impact

3. Moderate - Some strategic impact

2. Low - Minimal strategic impact

X

4. Significant - Necessary and significant strategic impact

2) Compliance Requirement:

2a)

Yes (Please specify)

X

No

2b)

2c)

2d) Check the appropriate box.

1. None - No measurable impact on compliance requirements.

2. Low - Small impact on compliance requirements.

X

3. Moderate - Necessary to maintain current compliance requirements.

4. Significant - Demonstrates measurable improvement and necessity for compliance.

May 28, 2013

Describe how this project will meet the stated policies and/or regulations requirements and the measureable impacts.

ESB supports the goals of the IT strategic plan to leverage common infrastructure, replace silos with end-to-end service capabilities and processes, and aid the

campus in viewing and utilizing data as an institutional asset. The enterprise service bus will:

•

Streamline data exchange between applications both within UCLA and outside, thus avoiding multiple point-to-point connections

• Enable data and protocol transformation between data providers and consumers, each choosing a native format that works best for them

• Enable incremental adoption of a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) with minimal disruption to existing business operations

• Enable reliable, asynchronous messaging to build highly available and fault tolerant applications

• Enable real time message exchange to support real time provisioning and de-provisioning of services (e.g., access to university IT resources, physical access to buildings, etc.)

• Apply standard and consistent authentication, security and monitoring policies across applications

• Improve auditing of data movement and tracking of service level agreements (SLA) between services

• Provide non-functional capabilities such as application-to-application authentication, security, logging, monitoring, error handling, recovery, auditing, deployment tools and a

management dashboard in a manner that alleviates this burden from individual applications

Is this project a requirement of the campus by any campus, Regental, State or Federal policy and/or regulation?

ESB is aligned with the UCPath initiative and will provide basic infrastructure for its success.

The project support UC objectives to achieve administrative efficiencies and utilize common solutions where feasible. The

project also support UC security policies in providing secure solutions for data transport and management.

ESB will result in more efficient and secure information exchange for enterprise systems, apply consistent and standard authentication and application monitoring in

addition to many other benefits.

Legacy data exchange across a broad spectrum of UCLA information systems has evolved organically over the past 40 years. Interfaces are generally developed to solve specific

needs and designed to exchange information two systems at a time. While the approach is expedient and effective at a smaller scale, it becomes problematic as the number of

systems grow. As point-to-point connections increase, it becomes increasingly costly to manage the tangled web of data loading/transfer processes. As business processes and

systems evolve, managing changes to the data transfer processes become major projects in themselves. Current data processes are also largely built around daily or weekly batch

exchange and lack the infrastructure to support real-time data exchange.

Describe the existing risk or exposure with the current situation.

FORM B: UCLA IT Investment Request Rating & Justification Form (FY 2012-13)

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

May 28, 2013

3) System Lifecycle Necessity:

3a)

X

Yes

No

3b) Describe any system lifecycle issues and its impact:

3c) Is project highly likely to be developed on time and on budget and fulfill functional specifications? Please explain

X

Yes

No

3d) Check the appropriate box:

1. None - No system lifecycle issues exists.

2. Low - Minimal system lifecycle needs will be addressed.

3. Moderate - Some system lifecycle issues / needs will be addressed.

X

4. Significant - Necessary and significant system lifecycle issue will be addressed.

4) Customer/User Impact:

4a) Identify the number of individuals in the following four categories that will be affected by the request/proposed project:

Make a Menu Selection:

Group

Faculty

Total Score:

Students

Departmental Staff

Central Admin Staff

Other: Specify:

4b) Describe the tangible benefits and how they will measured.

ESB is an important component of the UCPath project to replace the system-wide legacy Payroll Personnel System (PPS). Deployment of the ESB will

also have significant benefit for the replacement of other enterprise systems such as the Financial System.

Development and deployment of the ESB for UCPath is on schedule.

Quantity

The ESB will utilize open source software. The FUSE ServiceMix is a widely deployed and well-regarded product. There is potential that UC will standardize on

ServiceMix as a middleware solution.

Critical to business and operational needs: Enterprise integration standards will enable real-time information flow to support business process improvements and real-time

execution; constraints of the current batch oriented legacy applications will be eliminated over time. A modern and coherent information delivery solution for service integration, data

provisioning, reporting and enterprise analytics will speed web-based system development and help improve organizational agility.

Economies of scale / cost savings: The ESB will provide a more cost efficient way to manage, integrate, transform and route information flowing between UCLA administrative

system using a common solution than if many disparate approaches are used. Future enterprise systems will be deployed with consideration for longer-term evolution rather than

tactical, uncoordinated approaches that are difficult to maintain, hard to change and costly to support.

Is this project a replacement and/or upgrade of an existing enterprise or campus system? Please explain.

Local IT departments

1. 1-100

FORM B: UCLA IT Investment Request Rating & Justification Form (FY 2012-13)

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

May 28, 2013

4c) Describe how likely this project will be well embraced and used by the intended users?

4d) Describe any likely negative impacts on the intended and unintended users.

5) Workload Impact:

5a) Describe the likely impact of the project on workload (both positive and negative) and how it will be measured.

5b) Describe the savings produced by the implementation of the project and how it will be measured.

5c) Check the appropriate box:

1. None - No measurable impact on workload or too difficult to measure.

2. Low - Demonstrates minimal savings / impact on workload.

3. Moderate - Demonstrates some measurable savings / impact on workload.

X

4. Significant - Demonstrates measurable savings / impact on workload.

6) Financial/Fiscal Impact:

6a) Was a cost-benefit analysis conducted? Summarize the key points below and attach supporting documentation.

Yes

X

No

Once the ESB is adopted, savings will come from reduced development times by IT staff for new interfaces.

Once the ESB is implemented, it will significantly reduce the development time of new interfaces required for applications. It will also enable business process

improvement through real-time data exchange.

The UCPath, PAMS, IAMUCLA, BruinBill, IWE and OPUS projects intend to utilize ESB services. It also likely the Financial System replacement project will leverage

the ESB.

FORM B: UCLA IT Investment Request Rating & Justification Form (FY 2012-13)

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

May 28, 2013

6b) What is the financial impact of this project on the campus and department? Please explain.

Potential source of revenue

X

Financial savings

Other

6b) Specify the potential for generating revenue and/or cash savings for the departments and campus.

6c) Check the appropriate box:

1. None - No significant financial savings nor revenue.

2. Low - Demonstrates minimal financial savings and/or revenue.

X

3. Moderate - Demonstrates some measurable financial savings and/or revenue.

4. Significant - Demonstrates measurable financial savings and/or revenue.

7) Additional Information

7a) What are the consequences of NOT doing this project?

7b) Describe any issues / constraints / barriers that impact the successful implementation of this project.

7c) Describe any additional justification and/or rationale for this request / project not reflected in the criteria listed above.

UCPath is dependent on ESB. The absence of a common hub for information exchange will continue to perpetuate interface sprawl.

Once the ESB is adopted, savings will come from reduce system development time and business process improvements

enabled by real-time data exchange.

Once the ESB is adopted, savings will come from reduce system development time and business process improvements enabled by real-time data exchange.

Full value of the ESB is realized when multiple systems adopt and leverage its capabilities. This requires agreement on architecture, technology, messaging

approaches and governance across a service domain. Well-designed ESBs can deliver service interoperability but data integration and interoperability require agreed

data models, which can prove difficult to establish.

FORM C: UCLA IT Investment Project Financial Worksheet

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

Date:

Prepared by:

Summary of Costs and Available Funding Offsets

Permanent Costs

Categories:

_{FY 12-13}

_{FY 13-14}

_{FY 14-15}

_{FY 15-16}

_{FY 16-17}

_Total

FY xx-xx

1 Infrastructure 54,840 112,970 127,657 - - $ 295,467

$

127,657

2 Software Support 20,000 40,000 40,000 - - $ 100,000

$

40,000

3 Software Tools - 40,000 40,000 - - $ 80,000

$

40,000

4 Technical Training 30,000 30,000 - - - $ 60,000

$

-5 Consulting Services 15,000 15,000 15,000 - - $ 45,000

$

15,000

6 0 230,500 774,322 855,920 - - $ 1,860,742

$

855,920

7 0 - - - - - $ -

$

-8 0 - - - - - $ -

$

-9 0 - - - - - $ -

$

-10 0 - - - - - $ -

$

-TOTAL Costs: $ 350,340 $ 1,012,292 $ 1,078,577 $ - $ - $ 2,441,209 $ 1,078,577

Permanent Costs

Funding Source

FY 12-13

FY 13-14

FY 14-15

FY 15-16

FY 16-17

Total

FY xx-xx

A IAMUCLA 230,500 $ 230,500 B UCPath 119,840 317,211 $ 437,051 C $ -D $ -E $ -F $ -G $ -TOTALS: $ 350,340 $ 317,211 $ - $ - $ - $ 667,551 $

-Remaining (Unfunded) Balance:

$

-

$

695,081

$

1,078,577

$

-

$

-

$

1,773,658

$

1,078,577

May 28, 2013

Dattathreya Sharma

Estimated Five Year Development & Maintenance (One-time Investment) Costs

Estimated Total Project Costs

Estimated Five Year Development & Maintenance (One-time Investment) Costs Funding Offsets

Details of Estimated Project Costs

Permanent Costs

Category / Items

_{FY 12-13}

_{FY 13-14}

_{FY 14-15}

_{FY 15-16}

_{FY 16-17}

_Total

FY xx-xx

1.0 Infrastructure 1.1 Infrastructure Services 54,840 112,970 127,657 $ 295,467 127,657 Subtotal: $ 54,840 $ 112,970 $ 127,657 $ - $ - $ 295,467 $ 127,657 2.0 Software Support 2.1 Developer Subscription 20,000 10,000 10,000 $ 40,000 10,000 2.2 Production Subscription 30,000 30,000 $ 60,000 30,000 Subtotal: $ 20,000 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ - $ - $ 100,000 $ 40,000 3.0 Software Tools

3.1 ESB Management Tools 40,000 40,000 $ 80,000 40,000 Subtotal: $ - $ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ - $ - $ 80,000 $ 40,000

4.0 Technical Training

4.1 ESB Technical Training 30,000 30,000 $ 60,000 -Subtotal: $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 60,000 $

-5.0

5.1 ESB Consulting Services 15,000 15,000 15,000 - $ 45,000 15,000 Subtotal: $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ - $ - $ 45,000 $ 15,000 6.0 Staffing 6.1 Program Manager 77,471 159,590 164,239 $ 401,300 164,239 6.2 Architect 153,029 157,620 162,211 $ 472,860 162,211 6.3 Developer 132,098 135,945 $ 268,043 135,945 6.4 Integration Consultant 132,098 135,945 $ 268,043 135,945 6.5 Quality Assurance Engineer 132,098 135,945 $ 268,043 135,945 6.6 Support Engineer 60,818 121,635 $ 182,453 121,635

Subtotal: $ 230,500 $ 774,322 $ 855,920 $ - $ - $ 1,860,742 $ 855,920

TOTALS: $ 350,340 $ 1,012,292 $ 1,078,577 $ - $ - $ 2,441,209 $ 1,078,577 Financial Assumptions: Describe any particular assumptions that have been made to impact the financial estimates (such as annual inflationary rates, benefits, FTE average salary, etc.).

Ref. Notes

1.0

1.0

Infrastructure Services reflects an annual 3% adjustment to account for inflation 1.0

Infrastructure Services reflects an annual 10% increase in capacity growth starting from FY 2014-15 to accommodate additional applications coming on board each year 6.0

Staffing reflects an annual 3% salary adjustment to account for merits and inflation

Estimated Five Year Development & Maintenance (One-time Investment) Costs

Infrastructure Services reflects partial year pro-rated hardware cost for September 2012 to June 2013