[188259] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Why the US Government has so many data centers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (George Herbert)
Sun Mar 13 18:34:05 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: George Herbert <george.herbert@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1603131711530.71886@cnex.qbaryna.pbz>
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2016 15:34:04 -0700
To: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
I really don't care about AWS sales (customer, but not investor or employee)=
. But...
If it's not highly loaded, cloud is cheaper.
If it's not in a well run datacenter / machine room, cloud is FAR more relia=
ble.
The cost of blowing up hardware in less than well run machine rooms / datace=
nters can be immense. At a now defunct cell provider, we lost a badly maint=
ained machine room to fire, only about 24 racks, $2.1 million damage. And n=
early burned down the Frys Palo Alto building. And that's just the worst ca=
tastrophe; had more losses than that in smaller clusters / onsies.
George William Herbert
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 13, 2016, at 2:15 PM, Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com> wrote:
>=20
>> On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Roland Dobbins wrote:
>>> On 13 Mar 2016, at 3:03, George Herbert wrote:
>>>=20
>>> It's a symptom of trying to save a few cents at the risk of dollars.
>>=20
>> Concur 100%.
>>=20
>> Not to mention the related security issues.
>=20
> Just remember, no exceptions, no waivers.
>=20
> I understand why cloud vendors want 100% of government IT dollars. But
> requiring all test and development to be done solely in cloud data centers=
... there is your 100%
>=20
