Simplifying SAP PI to Integration Suite Migration with Proclus and Figaf

Figaf Aps

Introduction [00:00]

This session of "SAP Integration Coffee" features Daniel Graversen from Figaf and Jeroen Knops from Proclus, discussing the migration from SAP PI (Process Integration) to SAP Integration Suite (IS). The primary focus is on simplifying this migration process and addressing various challenges.

Planning a SAP PI to IS Migration [03:30]

Planning a successful SAP PI to IS migration involves several critical steps to ensure a smooth transition and optimize resource allocation.

• Company Self-Assessment: The initial and most crucial step is to understand the current state of a company's integrations and the capabilities of its available team for the migration.
  • Integration Landscape: Identify the types of integrations currently in use, such as IDoc file scenarios.
  • Team Maturity: Assess the team's integration maturity level and their readiness to adapt to new tools and processes.
• Comprehensive Assessment and Interface List: A detailed assessment is essential, starting with a complete list of interfaces.
  • Boring but Necessary Task: Compiling an interface list might be tedious but is vital for understanding what needs to be migrated and the effort involved.
  • Leveraging Tools: Tools like Figaf are used to provide insights beyond just the number of Integration Configuration Units (ICUs), showing details from both sender and receiver perspectives to estimate project duration and effort.
• Budget Allocation: Budget directly influences the migration path chosen.
  • Example Scenario: For a customer with over 300 EDI mappings, many of which hadn't changed since 2006, the approach involved copying and reusing them in the current B2B Trading Partner Management (TPM) to reduce costs.
  • Identifying Dormant Interfaces: Many older PI/PO interfaces remain untouched for years but are still in active use, posing challenges due to lack of documentation or institutional knowledge.
• Challenges in Migration: Not all components can be automatically migrated; custom elements often require manual intervention.
  • Java and XSLT Mappings: Complex mappings involving RFC calls, XSLT, Java, or ABAP in older systems often require significant manual effort.
  • Replacing Old Libraries: Java functions using old SAP Basis libraries cannot be directly migrated, requiring alternatives like Groovy scripts that replace dynamic attributes with Camel properties. Proclus has developed a checklist of standard solutions for these replacements.
  • Partial Automation: While some scenarios allow for one-on-one automatic migration, a substantial portion requires manual rework, especially for missing functionalities like BPMs.

BPM and Migrations [09:44]

Business Process Management (BPM) scenarios present unique challenges during migration.

• Technical vs. User-Interactive BPMs:
  • Technical BPMs: Most customers use BPMs for technical reasons, such as collecting and sending IDocs. These can often be replaced with normal integration flows in SAP Integration Suite.
  • User-Interactive BPMs: BPMs requiring user input are more problematic as Integration Suite lacks a direct user interface.
• SAP Workflow as an Alternative: For user-interactive BPMs, SAP Workflow is a viable alternative.
  • Manual Rebuilding: There is no automatic migration path; these BPMs need to be manually analyzed and rebuilt in SAP Workflow.
  • Effort Estimation: The effort varies greatly depending on the complexity of the BPM, ranging from 4-5 days for small ones to 8-9 days for very large ones.

RFC Lookups in IS [11:40]

Handling Remote Function Call (RFC) lookups in SAP Integration Suite requires a strategic approach.

• Migration Strategy Dependence: The method for handling RFC lookups depends on the overall migration strategy and budget.
  • Direct RFC Calls: For long-standing, stable RFCs with limited budget, direct calls to the existing RFCs can be maintained.
  • Modernization to OData APIs: Some customers prefer to modernize, converting RFCs to OData API calls, which are then integrated using request-reply blocks.
• Assessment Tool Assistance: Assessment tools can highlight the presence of RFC lookups, flagging them as elements needing special consideration during the migration journey.

New Support Processes [13:07]

Migrating from SAP PO to Integration Suite necessitates a complete overhaul of support and development procedures.

• Beyond System Movement: The migration is more than just moving from one system to another; it changes development practices, support procedures, and deployment mechanisms.
• Modernizing Deployment: The traditional method of exporting and importing Java/XSLT artifacts is outdated.
  • Automated Deployment Tools: Modern deployment tools like Figaf offer streamlined development processes and consistent deployments across different customer systems, which helps consultants work efficiently.
• Continuous Testing for Cloud Updates: A critical aspect of new support processes is continuous testing due to SAP's monthly cloud updates.
  • Automated Regression Testing: Unlike the infrequent testing in older on-premise systems, cloud environments require monthly regression testing to ensure critical interfaces, especially in B2B, continue to function smoothly.
  • Simplified Patching: While SAP handles system patching, eliminating the "dependency hell" of manual transports and Java files, customers still need to test thoroughly.
  • Upgrade Cycles: It's important for customers to place their production systems in a delayed upgrade cycle to allow for proper testing in lower environments before changes hit production.
• SAP PI Patching and Security: SAP continues to release support packages for older PI/PO systems, including critical security updates.
  • P4 Protocol Vulnerabilities: A recent update addressed a vulnerability in the P4 protocol that allowed remote code execution on PI systems, highlighting the ongoing need for patching.
  • Customer Adoption: Many customers are not diligent in applying these patches, often leading to SAP support refusing assistance until systems are updated. Integration Suite largely eliminates this issue with automated updates.

B2B Migration [19:20]

B2B migration is a significant challenge due to its inherent complexities and evolving landscape.

• New Paradigm: Migrating B2B integrations requires a fundamental shift in thinking and building approaches compared to traditional PI/PO.
• Leveraging Figaf: Figaf tools aid in B2B migrations, enabling direct migration of most interfaces without modification into the TPM ecosystem.
  • Manual Rework & Training: While direct migration is possible, initial efforts involve manual setup and a learning curve for the TPM.
  • Monitoring Challenges: Early versions of TPM had difficult monitoring due to the pipeline model involving multiple transactions, but newer TPM offers improved monitoring.
  • User-Friendly Interface: The new TPM provides an interface similar to the old PO system, simplifying onboarding for customers who want to manage partner configurations themselves.
• One-Click Migration for Operations: Figaf has introduced one-click migration for operation mappings, which automatically connects with correct TPM agreements and simplifies partner creation.
  • Trading Partner Agreements: The upcoming release will include automated transport of trading partner agreements, addressing a major pain point for manual migration and rework.

How to be involved as a customer [22:25]

Customer involvement in the migration journey varies based on internal capabilities and desired control.

• Outsourced vs. Minimal Internal Team:
  • Fully Outsourced: Some customers prefer to outsource the entire process, expecting consultants to handle development and ongoing support.
  • Minimal Team: Teams capable of day-to-day support should be actively involved in scoping, defining what is important, in use, and what needs to be tested.
• Testing and Support Handover:
  • Critical Phase: Testing is crucial for internal teams to understand common issues and learn how to fix them for future self-support.
• Developer Involvement for Modernization:
  • Hands-on Experience: Internal integration developers should participate in migrating a few interfaces, especially those involving modernization (e.g., API management, Integration Advisor) to gain hands-on experience with new tools.
  • Cost-Benefit: Migration is costly, but involving internal teams can maximize the value of the investment by upskilling staff and improving future operational efficiency.
• Collaboration and Trust:
  • Consultant-Customer Dialogue: Effective migration requires open communication between consultants and customers to address disagreements and find optimal solutions.
  • Beyond "Just Migrate": A simple "go migrate, we don't care" approach is detrimental; active engagement from customers ensures the migrated processes truly meet their needs.

RFP for your full migration [26:09]

When issuing Requests for Proposal (RFPs) for large migration projects, strategic considerations can enhance outcomes.

• Multiple Perspectives: For large projects (100-1000+ integrations), engaging multiple competing consultants or vendors might offer diverse and potentially better approaches.
• Business Understanding: It's valuable to have consultants who deeply understand the customer's business processes, not just technical migration. Smaller, communicative teams (3-4 consultants) tend to be more effective than large, distant teams lacking business context.
• Migration Velocity: To truly benefit from automation tools like Figaf, a certain migration speed is necessary. Migrating one scenario every two weeks won't build the necessary critical understanding of the tools.
• Definition of "Done": Clearly defining "done" is important; it's not just about the interface working but the entire business process functioning as before and ideally with improved ways of working.

Why become Figaf partner [28:44]

Proclus became a Figaf partner for several reasons, primarily focused on enhancing their SAP integration services.

• Solving Migration Challenges: Figaf initially helped Proclus with complex Seeburger B2B migrations, which were risky and difficult to perform manually.
• Streamlined Development Process: Figaf offers a comprehensive development process, not just a migration or testing tool.
  • SAP Integration Focus: It's specifically designed for SAP integration, working well with both SAP PO and Integration Suite, facilitating transitions between platforms.
  • Standardized Workflow: Provides a common way of working for all consultants, improving consistency and quality across different customer projects.
• Enhanced Quality and Reliability:
  • Automated Configuration Transport: Addresses issues with manual configuration transport in SAP CTS+ or SAP BTP, where forgetting adapter settings can lead to production failures and loss of customer trust. Figaf helps automate this, improving deployment reliability.

Why customers should look for Figaf partners [30:51]

Customers should consider Figaf partners for several benefits that modernize their integration landscape.

• Modernized Development and Testing:
  • Continuous Testing: In the cloud era, monthly regression testing is essential, unlike the infrequent testing of on-premise systems. Figaf facilitates this by making regression testing easy to run.
  • DevOps Modernization: The tool streamlines the entire DevOps process for integration.
• Time Savings and Efficiency:
  • Faster Transports and Testing: Saves time in both transporting and testing integration artifacts.
  • Improved Development Workflow: Makes it easier to track changes ("who did what") and compare iFlow versions, features often missing or cumbersome in Integration Suite natively.
• Cost-Effective Test Case Creation:
  • Migration Edition vs. Full Version: Figaf offers a migration edition where test cases are valid for 30 days. However, purchasing the full version is recommended for continuous regression testing, preventing the waste of effort in creating temporary test cases.
• New "Send Message" Feature:
  • PI Runtime Workbench Analogue: Figaf has introduced a "send message" feature similar to the PI runtime workbench, allowing developers to easily send messages to iFlows.
  • Record Message for Test Cases: A new "record message" option enables capturing payloads, switching to trace mode, and instantly creating reusable Figaf test cases in about a minute, facilitating documentation and continuous testing.

Infrastructure [36:11]

Infrastructure considerations are crucial for SAP Integration Suite migrations, especially when moving to the cloud.

• Beyond Cloud Simplicity: Many assume cloud migration eliminates infrastructure concerns, but this isn't entirely true.
  • Internal Expertise: Internal teams are vital as they understand the existing infrastructure, networking, and security configurations.
• Tooling Deployment: Decisions must be made on where to deploy auxiliary tools.
  • SAP BTP Cloud Foundry: Figaf recommends deploying their tool on SAP BTP Cloud Foundry. This reuses existing security setups, leverages SAP's certified platform, and offloads infrastructure management (database backups, user access management, SSL certificates) to SAP, simplifying the process for customers.
  • Cost Estimation: A standard setup (PostgreSQL, 4GB memory) costs around €300/month in BTP credits. For larger customers, more memory may be needed, increasing costs but still being "pocket change" in the overall project.
  • Alternatives: Running on a plain VM might be cheaper ($5-10/month) but requires significant self-management of infrastructure, adding complexity.

Edge Integration Cell [41:34]

The Edge Integration Cell (EIC) offers hybrid integration capabilities but comes with its own set of complexities.

• On-Premise Challenges: While the cloud simplifies much of the infrastructure, EIC on-premise brings back responsibilities for backups, networking, DNS, etc.
  • Suser Ranger Collaboration: Proclus is collaborating with Suser to set up EIC on bare-metal, highlighting the effort involved.
• Connectivity Limitations: The current EIC version can run for a maximum of four hours independently. If disconnected from the internet, integrations continue, but monitoring and management cease ("flying blind").
• Heavy Setup: EIC setup is complex and not fully automated because SAP cannot account for every customer's unique landscape (e.g., custom hostnames, firewall rules).
• Benefit for Manufacturing: Despite the complexity, EIC provides peace of mind for manufacturing operations, ensuring MES and warehouse management systems remain operational even with internet outages.
• Installation Time: An EIC installation typically takes about a week, factoring in obtaining services, accesses, and coordinating firewall rules with different organizational departments.
• Adoption and Features: Adoption of EIC is currently slow. Figaf experienced issues with trace functionality being removed and notes lacking features like partner directory support for pipeline concepts (expected in Q1).
• Workarounds and Costs: For missing partner directory functionality, customers might use Excel or value mappings, though not ideal for large-scale B2B. Running EIC on Azure can be expensive (~$400/month) without heavy usage, prompting considerations for cheaper local options like Suse Ranger.
• Offline Scenarios: EIC struggles with completely offline scenarios (e.g., military use cases) due to its reliance on cloud components for monitoring and development tools.
• API Management on EIC: API management is not yet integrated with EIC. Initial attempts to implement partner directory functionality on EIC proved challenging, leading to alternative approaches using value mappings for system lookups.
• Decision-Making: Customers must weigh the absolute need for EIC against alternative options like running Integration Suite in multiple cloud instances to achieve similar resilience without the on-premise infrastructure burden.

What influences your estimate [50:48]

Estimating costs and resources for migration projects, whether for 10 or 1,000 interfaces, is a crucial but complex task.

• Combination of Tools: Proclus uses a combination of SAP's assessment tool and Figaf's lists.
  • Discrepancy Detection: Often, SAP's initial estimates of work effort differ significantly from Figaf's detailed analysis, which can identify interfaces with 20+ receivers, indicating a more complex migration than initially assumed.
• Deep Dive into Data: It's essential to interpret assessment data carefully.
• Unexpected Discoveries: Surprises are common in migrations. For example, old Java mappings might contain entire document management systems or connect to other applications on the Java server, requiring extensive rework.
• Figaf's Technical Advantage: Figaf provides deeper technical insight into the system, helping to identify these hidden complexities and leading to more accurate estimations. The more familiar one is with the tool, the easier and more precise the estimations become.

Pipeline concept [54:50]

The pipeline concept in SAP Integration Suite is debated regarding its universal applicability.

• Default Approach for AS2/ASE: For AS2/ASE messages, the pipeline concept is often the default, as it inherently supports retry mechanisms and message staging, which is useful given the default behavior in PI.
• Workshop Example: In a workshop, a customer wanted to distribute IDocs to multiple systems with simple mappings. The recommendation was to modify XSLT to use a single receiver iFlow and then use the connectivity to look up system names and authentication algorithms via the partner directory, effectively separating logic.
• Benefits of Standardization: The pipeline concept can make onboarding new team members easier due to its standardized approach, especially compared to consultants creating their own, potentially inconsistent, pipeline concepts.
• Trade-offs and Use Cases:
  • When to Use: It makes sense for scenarios involving millions of IDocs or when "exactly once in order" processing is critical.
  • When Not to Use: Some customers find it too complex, especially for monitoring and quickly identifying errors. Smaller organizations might prefer simpler "one iFlow, one integration schema" approaches.
• Queue Management: The pipeline model often splits queues based on message priority (normal, high, low). Standard Integration Suite offers up to 100 default queues, expandable to 300 via OSS tickets. Edge Integration Cell can theoretically support unlimited queues, though each adds complexity.
• Exactly Once in Order (EOIO): EOIO is a significant challenge. Offloading this responsibility to the receiving system, if possible, is often the best approach.
• Alternative Queueing: Without the pipeline concept, each interface might need its own queue or a queue dispatcher, adding complexity.
• Edge Integration Cell Complexity: The complexity of installing and managing Edge Integration Cell, especially for Kubernetes requirements, is substantial, comparable to the challenges Basis teams faced with Java stack installations in the past.