Home / Resources / Cloud migration checklist

Free browser tool · Australian teams

Cloud migration readiness check

Before you choose a cutover date, find the evidence you still need. Keep the result without an email.

Sorami's cloud migration readiness check turns your workload context and documented preparation into a checklist report. Based on Microsoft CAF planning guidance and Google Cloud migration planning, it highlights missing evidence and unresolved blockers. It runs in your browser and offers planning candidates rather than validated designs. It estimates neither success nor schedules or savings.

What you get from the check

You get findings per area, an explanation for each candidate approach and a preparation list. Unknown means evidence is unknown, not safe. Choose one initial migration scope; different workloads may need separate checks.

AWS migration strategy guidance names seven Rs. They are retire and retain; rehost and relocate; repurchase and replatform; and refactor or re-architect. This tool uses those AWS labels for discussion, not as a vendor-neutral certification. VMware does not imply that relocation is supported on every target. A container workload does not establish a reason to refactor.

Google Cloud places dependency mapping and foundation design before wave planning. Microsoft CAF asks for recovery tolerances and tested rollback procedures. The questions below record whether you have that evidence; they do not read it.

Check one migration scope

Self-assessment. Not a validated readiness assessment or a quote.

No personal records or credentials are needed. Do not enter names, hostnames or IP addresses. Answers remain in this page's memory. Refreshing or resetting clears them. No answer or result is sent to analytics.

Which workload types are in this initial scope?
Provisional: no answers selected.

1. Workload context

Context describes this scope. It does not earn evidence points.

Current workloads and target
Where do these workloads run today?

The source affects discovery tooling and compatibility checks. It does not prove migration readiness.

Which target are you considering?

A target is context only. Region, service availability and vendor support still need checking.

How large is the initial scope?

Use a scope range for the enquiry. A workload count is not a duration or price estimate.

What is the main reason for considering a move?

This records your reason, not a business case. Compare retaining the current service before selecting a strategy.

Support and licence constraints
Are unsupported operating systems or applications in scope?

Unsupported components need vendor support and target compatibility review before choosing a migration method.

Which licence constraints need review?

Licence mobility and support depend on the exact agreement and target service. A vendor name is not permission.

Data and applicable obligations
What is the highest data classification in scope?

Include backups, logs and support access when classifying data. Do not enter personal records into this tool.

Which obligations have you identified?

APRA standards apply to APRA-regulated entities. Customer contracts and government requirements need separate review.

Have region and overseas access requirements been checked?

Australian hosting alone does not answer who can access data. APP 8 addresses overseas disclosure, not a universal local-storage rule.

2. Evidence for this scope

Choose documented only for records you have checked. Missing and unknown remain separate findings.

Workload inventory and dependencies
Is there an inventory with versions, utilisation and business owners?

Microsoft CAF calls for workload details before sequencing. Asset names alone miss ownership and runtime requirements. Planning source

Are databases, APIs, scheduled jobs and authentication dependencies mapped?

Google Cloud asks for dependency mapping before wave planning. Latency-sensitive links need an explicit move group. Planning source

Recovery and cutover
Are business-approved RTO and RPO recorded per workload?

Microsoft CAF bases migration methods on downtime tolerance. RTO is restoration time; RPO is tolerable data loss. Planning source

Has an isolated restore been tested and its recovery time recorded?

A backup existing is different from evidence that it restores. Microsoft CAF calls for tested rollback procedures. Planning source

Are cutover checks, write reconciliation and rollback authority rehearsed?

Microsoft CAF calls for workload-specific rollback instructions and testing. A DNS reversal alone may not reconcile new writes. Planning source

Identity and network
Are target federation, MFA, least privilege and emergency access tested?

Google Cloud foundation guidance includes IAM. Check user and service identities rather than just account creation. Planning source

Are DNS, routing, firewall rules and transfer capacity tested?

Google Cloud includes networking in foundation design. Dependencies need verified routes before data or traffic moves. Planning source

Data and obligations
Are classification, retention and permitted recipients documented?

OAIC APP 8 distinguishes use from overseas disclosure. Storage location is only one part of the handling review. Planning source

Has an accountable reviewer confirmed the applicable obligations?

APRA standards address regulated entities. A supplier may face contractual requirements without itself being APRA-regulated. Planning source

Landing zone and governance
Is the target landing zone tested for this workload scope?

Google Cloud requires foundations before planning waves. A subscription alone does not test IAM, networking or monitoring. Planning source

Are budgets, ownership tags and change approval in place?

Google Cloud foundation guidance includes resource management and billing. Record who approves changes and owns ongoing charges. Planning source

Ownership and skills
Can named engineers rehearse migration and operate the target?

Microsoft CAF asks teams to assess cloud skills and seek support where needed. Attendance at training is not a rehearsal. Planning source

Has the owner compared moving with retaining or replacing the workload?

AWS includes retain and repurchase among the seven strategies. A hosting deadline alone does not choose the right approach. Planning source

Answer the questions and choose a workload to get a report.

Ask Sorami to discuss this scope

Only a deliberate submit sends anything. It sends your report, scope answers and contact details to FormSubmit and Sorami. Review the report first. Do not include sensitive system details.

An enquiry, not a quote or booking. Scope and fee agreed in writing. Privacy notice.

How the score and findings work

The score is informational checklist completion. Each of the 13 evidence questions has equal weight: one point for documented and checked, zero for missing or unknown. Context fields earn no points. The total is documented items divided by evidence items, rounded to a percentage. Area scores use the same calculation within each area. Equal weighting makes the arithmetic inspectable, not scientifically validated.

Unresolved dependency or recovery evidence is a blocker under Sorami's checklist rules. So are unverified access, data handling or target foundations. Context can add licence, compatibility or region blockers. All blockers remain visible regardless of the average. A fully documented checklist still requires evidence review and a rehearsal, not automatic approval.

Candidate rules are conservative: unresolved support, dependencies, restricted-region conditions or an undecided target suggest discussing retain first. Databases and containers suggest comparing replatform after compatibility tests. Email and vendor applications suggest comparing repurchase. Other supported scopes suggest comparing rehost. This tool never automatically chooses relocate or refactor because its inputs do not establish platform eligibility or a redesign business case.

What this tool does not do

It does not inspect infrastructure, test backups, confirm licence rights or issue certification. It cannot validate a wave plan or determine legal compliance. It does not select a cloud region or promise a price, duration or savings. One combined answer set cannot capture every workload's dependency or recovery requirement.

Which Australian obligations need a separate review?

OAIC APP 8 guidance concerns cross-border disclosure of personal information by APP entities. It distinguishes disclosure from use and includes exceptions. It is not a rule that all Australian data must stay in Australia. Review overseas support access, recipients and contracts as well as storage regions. Other laws and contracts may impose different conditions.

APRA CPS 230 addresses operational resilience and service-provider risks for APRA-regulated entities. CPS 234 addresses their information security capability and control testing. Neither applies to every Australian business merely because it uses cloud services. Supplier obligations may arise through customer contracts. Your legal or compliance reviewer must decide applicability; this tool offers no legal advice.

Sorami's view

Choose a first scope that you can restore, not simply the easiest VM to copy. Keep a dependency register, a tested restore record and written rollback authority together. Use the report to ask precise questions about unknowns. A scoping conversation for Australian cloud migration services starts with those records rather than a guessed go-live date.

What to prepare next

  1. Export an inventory with owners, versions and utilisation.
  2. Map database, API, authentication and scheduled-job dependencies.
  3. Record outage tolerance and acceptable data loss per workload.
  4. Restore a copy and rehearse rollback with write reconciliation.
  5. Review licence terms, data handling and target foundations.
  6. Assign migration, approval and ongoing operational owners.

Sources used for this checklist

Primary guidance opened for this implementation on 5 October 2026. Source guidance informs the questions; the scoring and candidate rules are Sorami's own informational choices.

Questions before you book

Practical answers.

What is a cloud migration readiness assessment?

An evidence-led review checks workload inventory, dependencies, recovery requirements and target foundations. Microsoft CAF describes these planning checks. This free self-assessment only records what you say is documented; it does not inspect systems or validate readiness.

Can I download a cloud migration checklist template?

Yes. Answer the questions and download or copy the report without supplying an email. It includes your scope, answers, gaps and preparation list. With JavaScript disabled, the visible questions can be printed as a blank template.

Does Australian data have to stay in Australia?

Not as a universal rule. OAIC APP 8 concerns cross-border disclosure by APP entities and includes exceptions. Other laws or contracts may impose location or access restrictions. Ask your privacy or legal reviewer to check your circumstances.

Does a high score mean our migration is ready?

No. The score is informational checklist completion, not a success probability or certification. Unknown and missing evidence earn no points. Blockers remain visible even when other areas are documented. Compatibility, dependency study and rehearsals are still required.

Are answers or contact details sent automatically?

No. Answers stay in this page until you deliberately submit an enquiry. The report is included in that submission to FormSubmit and Sorami. A completion event contains only the tool name and a constant completion label, never answers or scores.

Discuss the evidence, not a guessed score

See cloud migration services or contact Sorami. Explore the cloud practice and pricing and custom scope. Migration scope is quoted individually, not priced by this tool.

Last reviewed: