The chain of hotel brands are certified by wireless real names, and single shops and group deployments are two-size engineering. One single door is secured, and the network can be online for half a day. But at the group level, dozens or even hundreds of stores have different web environments, PMS versions may differ, start up times may vary, local compliance requirements may not be the same.
Let's decide whether to manage centrally or in a distributed manner.
The management structure for wireless real name certification in hotels and hotels first has to answer a question at the group level: whether the certification strategy is centralized or managed by the respective door. The benefits of central management are strategic coherence, compliance risk control, high transport efficiency; the disadvantages are that the ability to match the network-based variations of each hotel is weak and implementation will be stuck if headquarters gives a standard template but the door shop network does not support it.
Distributive management in turn: each door shop can adjust its own certification strategy and be flexible, but compliance is difficult to guarantee. In case a store closes the real name for a reason or changes it into simple mobile phone validation, something happens to a group pot."Focus on strategy development, doorman implementation strategy, and exception reporting"and the compromise.
Certification of the platform and management of the platform ' s separate design
From a system architecture perspective, it is proposed to separate the authentication and management functions. Each door office NATSHEL_AUTH_GATEWAY handles local requests for certification and network release, which is a real-time system with high time delay and availability requirements and cannot rely on the quality of wide area network links.
The management platform, including strategic releases, log aggregations, compliance reports, and alerts for shipping, is more appropriate in cloud or group data centres. The management of the platform's links is broken to affect real-time updates of statements at most, and should not affect real-time authentication of the door. If a doorway is blocked, it is a design flaw on the system architecture.
Unique identification in multi-brand and pMS settings
Many hotel chains have several brands running at the same time, in economics, middle and high-end. Different brands may be using different PMS systems, or even a version of the door shop PMS that operates at different times under one brand.
It is proposed to add an intermediate matching layer between Authentication Gateway and PMS to harmonize the interfaces of each PMS into a standardized data format. This fit-out layer does not necessarily have to be heavy, but it is key to turn them into one."Resident identification plus room number."This minimum data set is abstracted and then tailored to each PMS.
Groups have stepped on the pit at this step: initially, it was easy to ask all the shops to upgrade PMS to the same version and then to do the authentication docking. It turns out that dozens of stores’ PMS upgrading programs were delayed for two years, and the certification program has been delayed.
How do you digest the Internet differences in the store?
The biggest management challenge when the group deployed hotel hotels with a common wireless real name certification is not technology per se, but the network conditions of each store are different. Some are new, some have been purchased for nearly two years and there are virtually no obstacles to deployment. Others have been open for more than 10 years, core exchanges have not even been managed, and AC's hard copy version may have stopped being updated long ago.
It is proposed to do a comprehensive web mapping exercise at the group level, divided into three categories according to the network conditions of the gate: those that can be deployed directly and require minor modifications and need major changes. Then it will be implemented in batches, first with the best-conditioned door, then with the link running, and then with the management process, moving gradually to more complex doors.
Do not expect all the hotels to be deployed at the same time. The logical cycle for a chain of hotels is quarterly, covering 20% of the shops and running steady before expanding.
How to balance the harmonization of compliance and regional differentiation at the group level
Public security in different regions does not require full approval of the real name of a hotel online."Global default strategy plus area coverage": The group establishes a minimum compliance baseline on which regions can superimpose local requirements but not below the baseline standard.
The chain of hotel brands is much more complex to manage than to deploy technology when it comes to wireless real name certification in hotels. When the architecture is designed, it takes a little bit longer to plan for management, and the next operating dimension is easier. The Wireless Real Name Certification of Hotels is not a system that can be handed over to the door shop IT itself when it is online. It involves compliance, experience and cross-sectoral coordination, requiring dedicated personnel to continue operations. Without this role, the system will become susceptible to a range of operational problems, such as old strategies, delays in compliance, slow response to problems, and so forth after six months of operation.