[At-Large] R: Cruz' revenge
roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com
Mon Oct 3 21:35:25 UTC 2016
I don’t understand the “pun intended” issue.
About the contents, I am with you implying that there is a cost-benefit issue about decisions on the backup issues.
However, being a well-known paranoiac, I am worried about the possible bad press about it.
That is why I do hope that we will have no hiccups, not even minor ones, in Hyderabad.
The eyes of the world will be upon us.
Da: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com]
Inviato: lunedì 3 ottobre 2016 20:00
A: Roberto Gaetano
Cc: At-Large Worldwide
Oggetto: Re: [At-Large] Cruz' revenge
Please tell me the first question is "pun intended" ;-) As to the second; well I understand it's prudent to have backup of network services/data but what does having a backup of over 100 tons of hardware mean? I think it definitely will mean a lot of redundancy resulting to a waste of resources as well.
As I note from the announcement, looks like a number of the devices has been replaced. The remote hubs will be the major hit. I can imagine the ICANN tech are working around the logistics.
Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 3 Oct 2016 18:21, "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com<mailto:roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com>> wrote:
• We always talk about disaster recovery, duplication of resources, etc. Why did we not put in place these measures? The question will now be “if those folks cannot secure their own equipment, how can they be trusted to take care of the Internet?”
• What will be the real impact for the meeting? I cannot believe that we do not have backup solutions, as Murphy implies.
We live in interesting times indeed. Brings me back to 1998, when CORE servers were stolen.
At-Large mailing list
At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the At-Large