RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Hugh Smith <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 15 Mar 2016 12:52:24 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (79 lines)
> From: "Roach, Bill" <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> Subject: Re: Sony's Optical Archive Could Kill Tape Data Archiving
> Date: March 14, 2016 at 11:10:48 AM EDT
> 
> 
> << The concept of storing all the eggs in one basket has always been problematic.  These massive libraries seem to present E-Discovery nightmares.>>
> 
> It’s not often I disagree with Hugh, this is one of those times.  

Now that is the nicest thing I have read all week.   If I can match up with Bill and Larry and the rest of you icons even a few times, it makes me feel great. 

If Bill disagrees then I must be wrong.  But I want to understand why I am wrong?

I saw a collection of these large optical disk in an offsite storage center; and we were building a vault for them. Since they seemed to me to be repetitive back ups I could not understand why they needed  (literally the number was 10,000+ of these 10” or 11” optical platters.) such a large vault when the archive was a repetitive back up.  No one could explain to me why they were keeping them all??  And of course they no longer had the thing that reads them.  They were purely archival. But they covered a litigious period of time so Legal said save everything.

So if there was E-Discovery, would they have had to go through all 10,000 platters to see if anything was different on each one.  That seems to be extremely expensive. 

> My experience has been that managing records and information assets like Warren Buffet manages investments is the way to go:  “ Put all you eggs in the basket and watch that basket."  

Now you realize, as a Vault Guy, that if I say that it would seem self-serving.  I love all the eggs in “one really protected" basket.  (Unfortunately for me that seems to be fading as a technology.)  They seem to favor putting everything in one really large Cloud and then using the same failed pattern of back up for each Cloud iteration.

> One of the my big reasons for doing so is to simplify eDiscovery efforts.  Granted it takes more time to go through larger collections and the results lists can be massive.

In my mind, I have visions of this Datamap that tells me what is on each server, hard drive, back up tape and so forth.  Once the audit shows that the samples agree with the map then the map can be trusted and E-Discovery can be more efficient.  Although I will admit that true Datamaps and Unicorns both seem to be mythical beasts in most organizations.  But sooner or later in E-Discovery, the Datamap does materialize after much collaboration.

>  Fewer collection and search configurations are a benefit as is the significant reduction in unnecessary duplication often associated with multiple smaller collections.

How does one show the track of the best evidence original, the versions, the depublication on such a system.  Does it just maintain everything. 
>  (Users are a lot like squirrels, they bury nuts (content) everywhere so they will be sure to find one where ever they look.)
> 
> Besides, I am Irish, love ribs and I look forward to the seasonal offering of the McRib. 

Then I wish you a Happy St. Patrick’s Day.  I was in Philly and by accident I stumbled into the middle of their St. Paddy’s Day Parade. “And myself, without a scrap of green on myself.”  Imagine the Irish accent there.
> 
> Bill Roach, CRM



Snip from Larry:

> The purpose of providing these numbers is to demonstrate an example of a
> portion of the volume of data that is being retained that has no value when
> an organization captures all e-mail at the incoming server and stores a
> copy, simply because “storage is (once again) cheap".

Another thing the Cloud refuses to point out is that while storage may be relatively cheap compared with past technologies, that it is the continual build up that wipes away that advantage.  But even if you assume that storage is extremely cheap, it is accessing the storage for any sort of recovery or continual archival access becomes very expensive.  A business continuity back up from a Cloud system is very expensive and no one is talking about what it would cost to perform E-Discovery from Cloud based storage in an honest manner.  (Now Mr. King… no more White Papers and Webinars.  I am still trying to resolve all those previous discussions about Cloud storage. )
> 
> So, to circle back and make my point about physical mail at home...NO ONE
> saves every piece of mail they receive, why should businesses do it with
> e-mail? Or other data, for that matter. Unless you're in an industry
> segment that is VERY risk tolerant, a "keep everything" strategy is both
> costly and potentially dangerous.  It results in a 'digital landscape
> fraught with e-discovery landmines'.
> 
> Larry

This goes back to the discussion about the Classification and retention schedules of last week.

It is interesting that the Big Data guys continually leave out the records management piece of the equation when it comes to retention, classification; and, destruction of records that no longer need to be part of the realm.

Remember Brer’ Rabbit and the Tar Baby?? Well “Electronic Records” is the new tar baby.  Watch and see.  I bet you will see examples in the coming days where you can witness Big Data touch the tar of Electronic Records.  The Judges and Federal Courts melted the tar and poured it all over the digital records empire.  Each week we see a new touch and someone else drawn into the Tar. Will Sony and Crossroads and other storage silos be able to satisfy the courts?

On the NFPA 232 and NFPA 75 Technical Committees; Fred and Larry and Dick watched the Server Room guys struggle with the concept of electronic records. And the records managers made it so simple. Records are not defined by their format but by their content and if the Courts recognize the need for the content, then the Owner of the content must provide these records in paper or microfilm or any format the court recognizes. The new fork in the road is whether records are readable or machine readable.

Now I am hungry for a McRib…

Hugh Smith
FIRELOCK Fireproof Modular Vaults
[log in to unmask]
(610)  756-4440    Fax (610)  756-4134
WWW.FIRELOCK.COM



List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2