A foundation evolves through exceptions
Permissions and private-access gaps: the review identifies dependencies relevant to the decision without rebuilding the whole landing zone.
Cloud Architecture Review: decide before transforming
A Cloud decision stalls because dependencies, risks or recovery requirements are not understood.
Compare options for a particular application or foundation without assuming a migration must take place.
Services
When to engage?
A migration lacks confirmed prerequisites
Applications, recovery and ownership remain uncertain; separate facts from assumptions before choosing a path.
Multi-cloud is proposed without trade-offs
Compare Azure, AWS and GCP options and their effects on security, resilience and operating workload.
A three-step engagement
- 01
Frame the decision
I scope the applications and service requirements with you, and identify decision makers and available diagrams.
- 02
Test assumptions
I compare configurations with reported behavior, then assess dependencies, recovery and operating costs without assuming a cutover.
- 03
Present options
I deliver trade-offs, risks and missing evidence; implementation requires a separate agreement.
What you receive
- Decision dossierCompared options, assumptions and security, resilience and operating implications.
- Shareable dependency mapComponents, access paths and ownership relevant to the decision at an agreed level of detail.
- Path and readiness criteriaSteps, prerequisites and evidence needed before changing a foundation or migrating.
Scope and prerequisites
Scope and prerequisites. Selected applications and foundations, available diagrams and configurations, IAM, networking and operations owners; access is agreed during scoping.
Review boundaries. No foundation deployment, data migration or cutover test included. Preparing an actual pilot belongs to Landing Zone & Migration Ready.
A question about your environment? Tell me about it: I'll define a useful scope with you before starting.
Contact me