dslreports logo
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery


how-to block ads

Search Topic:
share rss forum feed

reminds me of the danse russe
Chandler, AZ
reply to rradina

Re: Disk is cheap and the data is immutable...

said by rradina:

Can we define "costlier"? Even if it's exceedingly large volumes of data, they can use tiered storage, compress the hell out of it and move it off-line onto something cheap.

its not about the size and tier of the storage -- its just as much about the performance of said architecture.
i work in the network architecture/design field and routinely have to engage technical architects around performance requirements for the virtualized compute environments and storage arrays. there are many "gotchas" around each of the major storage vendors and even down to the drives and protocols/access methods in use. it comes down to having a storage architect designing the entire array and infrastructure to handle that.

plus -- you have to start looking at the infrastructure to even capture or log this data. inline taps on the network are great -- but are you simply going to look at them at the egress point(s) on the network? can you find a device or cluster of devices to archive and log this data -- then dump it onto the storage network without losing any information? if you can't -- how do you spread this load out so that it is workable? can you fit it within your existing architecture. what about capex for the gear and redesign work? what about opex for the spin-up, training, and management of these new components in the network?

its not like a home network where you just throw another drive in the nas and go. there is a lot of high-performance infrastructure design needs that need to be met to fit this into a network. there isn't a 'one size fits all' solution -- nor is it something that is easy to overcome. dane has it right -- this is *costly*.



Chesterfield, MO

An excerpt from the bill:

(a) IN GENERAL. Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

They don't have to capture all the data and it doesn't appear to apply to wireless providers (assuming mobile, not fixed). Mobile wireless would be a nightmare since the IP logs are probably a mess with folks moving from place to place.

Are you honestly going to tell me they cannot retain DHCP logs?!?!?! According to this, they don't even have to keep URL access logs. In my opinion, the ISPs are whining about nothing. And, as usual, information is power and the uninformed crowd has taken sides and is crowing about NOTHING!

What's ridiculous is that I posed a question, "define costlier". I get tripe responses like "it would cost more" or folks going off the deep end talking about the architectural complexities and costs of storing hundreds of terabytes of data per month.

Now I'll be the first to apologize if I missed something in the bill that forces ISPs to keep the DATA and the logs. Keeping the DATA is unreasonable and if true, everyone who said it was crazy is correct. However, I read the ENTIRE bill and the only part that I can find that applies to ISPs seems like a VERY REASONABLE request from our government. ISPs will incur practically NO additional cost to implement regardless of size.