[tech] [committee] 24 hour warning: This Week's Committee Meeting Agenda

Matt Didcoe matt at didcoe.id.au
Fri May 13 08:21:53 WST 2011


Offsite backups are great, but lets be a little more specific - WHAT
are UCC looking to backup offsite? That'll effect the amount of disk
required, how much it'll flog the network etc.

In theory Arts (read: Rob and I) have no problem with the idea and we
agree - sooner rather than later is a good idea, but there are a few
things to iron out - like what UCC would be dropping in and what
effect, if any, the core network upgrade will have (given the Arts DC
is served off a different VRF zone under the new plan).

I'll have a chat to Richard at IS about the second bit and perhaps we
could clarify here:

1) What we want to store offsite
2) What disk could be coming with musundo

Cheers,
Matt [MRD]

On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 6:12 AM, Jacques Chester <jacques at chester.id.au> wrote:
>
> On 12/05/2011, at 10:42 PM, James French wrote:
>
>> My suggestion would be to exchange manduba for musundo+disk at Arts
>> and do it ASAP. The understanding I put in place four* years ago was
>> agreed on by the late Mike Neville and was kept running under the last
>> FC manager (who left a month ago). There's going to be a new manager
>> in the not to distant future and there is no obligation for them keep
>> us in the room.
>
> If Arts kick us out, I've found tarsnap to be cheap and effective
> for backing up my Ozblogistan servers. I've got daily snapshots
> going back about 9 months of ~4Gb of stuff. Total cost, $8.
>
> Cheers,
>
> JC.
>
>


More information about the tech mailing list