[100049] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Sun Project Blackbox / Portable Data Center
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jerry Dixon)
Sat Oct 13 23:52:18 2007
X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.mailhop.org/outbound/abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
From: Jerry Dixon <jerry@jdixon.com>
To: Alan Clegg <alan@clegg.com>
In-Reply-To: <47118783.9000406@clegg.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 23:49:07 -0400
Cc: nanog <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Poor word choice on my part regarding command center versus data
service augmentation.
However there are many capabilities that this setup can bring to bear
no differently than a military TOC is established out in a forward
operating site.
I do agree that a good DR plan and hot/warm sites are a necessity for
critical services however there are uses for this capability. One
only needs to look at Katrina or 9/11 where a solution like this would
have shown benefits in augmenting a larger DR plan and quickly
providing computing or network services depending on how it was built
out.
Just to add a disclaimer, these are my opinions and not an official
stance by the government.
Jerry
Jerry@jdixon.com
On Oct 13, 2007, at 11:05 PM, Alan Clegg <alan@clegg.com> wrote:
> Jerry Dixon wrote:
>
>> We've looked at these from a DHS perspective and they are a great
>> concept. I know Sun has had the boxes here in DC on tour and worth
>> checking out. I believe FEMA was in process of looking into
>> leveraging
>> them for disaster command centers along with the military.
>
> As a long time network professional, volunteer firefighter, CERT[*]
> team
> member/instructor, and Red Cross disaster response volunteer, I'd
> wonder
> why ANYONE would want one of these.
>
> If your "command center" is close enough to require this specialized
> configuration, YOU ARE TOO CLOSE. Please stay somewhere that you have
> functional/reliable power, walls that are not falling down, and hotel
> rooms for your staff.
>
> The idea of moving your data center INTO the hot zone would scare the
> bejeebers out of me. I've been to large fires, hurricane aftermath,
> floods, tornado paths, and nowhere have I seen a need for these
> things.
>
> If you have a spare data center somewhere "geographically diverse"
> from
> your primary, you're golden and you don't need a unit like this.
>
> The concept of moving one of these things into an area that is still
> without normal utilities is not only dangerous to the equipment "in
> the
> box", but also begins to steal from the limited resources that are
> being
> used to rehabilitate the incident scene.
>
> Why not get a couple of high-powered communication trucks that would
> allow network connectivity from the disaster zone instead of
> endangering
> your hardware and putting non-essential personnel into a dangerous
> situation?
>
> Who's going to hire the private army that you are going to need to
> protect these monsters? (I understand that one is available) And who's
> bringing in the food for the poor technicians that are being deployed
> with the crate?
>
> If you have the choice of using preciously scarce fuel to power your
> data center in a box or to help prepare and transport meals to
> people in
> need, which will you do?
>
> Maybe I'm missing the point.
>
> If you told me you were using one of these to deploy a preliminary
> data
> center while a permanent facility was being built, I'd think you were
> much more on track, but for emergencies?
>
> AlanC
>
> [*] Community Emergency Response Team, not computer related:
> http://www.wakecountycert.org
>
