Select a data center and migration wave. The dependency graph updates live — green nodes are migrating, orange are split across cloud and on-prem, red dashed edges are broken dependencies that need action before cutover. Click any stack node to run a blast radius simulation.
A multi-hospital healthcare system needed to migrate 1,053 servers across four global data centers. The challenge wasn't technical — it was decision-making under uncertainty. Which applications could move first? Which had hidden dependencies that would break something else? Which servers were oversized and burning budget? How much connectivity infrastructure needed to exist before a given wave could safely cut over? Every one of those questions required synthesizing data across discovery scans, application registries, network flows, and financial models — and that synthesis didn't exist.
The stakeholders couldn't approve a wave sequencing plan because they couldn't see what approving it actually meant. "Migrate Wave 3" was an abstraction — not a concrete picture of which stacks would split, which dependencies would go cross-boundary, and how much runway they had before the network team needed to provision connectivity. The information existed; the interface to reason over it didn't.
The design principle was: the client should be able to ask "what happens if I migrate Wave 2 in Sydney?" and immediately see the answer — not as a table of numbers, but as a live visual model of the resulting state. Every data source — discovery scans, dependency mapping, utilization telemetry, application classification — was unified into a single dataset and compiled into a self-contained file that runs entirely in the browser. No server, no authentication, no setup — because engagement deliverables have to work on a laptop in a client conference room.
The 5-wave sequencing model — Foundation, Non-Prod, Easy Prod, Medium Prod, All Prod — encodes migration best practices so the sequencing is defensible, not just convenient. Each wave threshold is a risk gate: Wave 3 only includes simple Rehost workloads because those have the highest migration success rate and the lowest blast radius if something goes wrong. The structure gives the client a plan they can explain to their board.
Migration steering committees typically spend the first half of every meeting re-establishing context — which servers are in scope, what the dependencies look like, what the network team needs before Wave N can proceed. This dashboard replaced that conversation. Stakeholders could walk into a review with a shared, interactive ground truth and spend the meeting on decisions rather than orientation.