RE: [SAC] Server host quotes

Committees SAC mailing list
1

I don't see any huge downside.

The packages look good, and PEER1 itself seems to have a good
reputation.

Would it be a reasonable use of Telascience's kindly shared resources to
set up downloads.osgeo.org there, and use that host for file
distribution?

I'm not sure that we have a lot to worry about, but it might make sense
to set this up from the start?

Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Bray
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 21:44
To: sac@sac.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [SAC] Server host quotes

Jason,

From looking at the details I am leaning toward Peer1. Am I missing
something? It almost seems to good.

Bob

Jason Birch wrote:

Hi all,

I've got the three quotes back along with some clarifications. I

asked initially for quotes on configurations including two servers that
had at least dual core or dual-cpu, 2Gb memory, and RAID. I also asked
that additional options ( for example dual PSUs, lights-out cards,
backups, and managed firewall services) be quoted as additional options
if they had the flexibility.

Some of the quotes are marked as confidential, so I can't distribute

them on the public mailing list. I will be making them available in an
obscure directory as a password protected zipfile on my personal
website; if you are interested in seeing them, please email me and I'll
send you the location and password offline. In the zipfile, each quote
and supporting documentation (including follow up clarifications I asked
for) is in its own directory.

Here's my initial analysis...

- EasyStreet looks like a good solution, but the price seems high for

the hardware/bandwidth compared to the other providers.

- HE's hardware isn't high-end (and they don't offer higher levels),

but bandwidth costs are reasonable and scaling out to additional servers
is relatively inexpensive. I like that the bandwidth is unbundled from
the hardware maintenance; it allows us to grow either processing
capacity or traffic independently.

- PEER1 seems to offer good value and great hardware, bandwidth is

metered by total so spikes can't ruin our whole month, and they have
additional services like managed firewall and daily offsite backups.
Their quote didn't include setup fees (may be able to get them waived).

I really welcome your feedback on this. We need to avoid talking

specific prices or otherwise giving away the details of the quotes on
the public email list. I think that the best approach might be if I
start a massive CC list as you email me for the quote info.

Jason

2

Jason Birch wrote:

Would it be a reasonable use of Telascience's kindly shared resources to
set up downloads.osgeo.org there, and use that host for file
distribution?

Folks,

I'd like to suggest using shell.telascience.org (198.202.74.218) as a
download server. We have roughly 6GB free, and free up another 3GB fairly
easily. I'd be willing to do some setup for this purpose, and updates
to the wiki if SAC is agreeable.

I would note that it has proven pretty slow to get new DNS pointers for
the .osgeo.org domain (several weeks for my last request) so it might
be good for us to set this up as downloads.osgeo.net if we have active
control of osgeo.net now.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

3

What's next to get this done. Jason - is there something I can help with on this or do you just need to finalise their bid?

Any of the other SAC members have an opinion on the bids?

I am +1 on PEER1.

Tyler

On 6-Nov-06, at 8:24 AM, Jason Birch wrote:

I don't see any huge downside.

The packages look good, and PEER1 itself seems to have a good
reputation.

Would it be a reasonable use of Telascience's kindly shared resources to
set up downloads.osgeo.org there, and use that host for file
distribution?

I'm not sure that we have a lot to worry about, but it might make sense
to set this up from the start?

Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Bray
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 21:44
To: sac@sac.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [SAC] Server host quotes

Jason,

From looking at the details I am leaning toward Peer1. Am I missing
something? It almost seems to good.

Bob

Jason Birch wrote:

Hi all,

I've got the three quotes back along with some clarifications. I

asked initially for quotes on configurations including two servers that
had at least dual core or dual-cpu, 2Gb memory, and RAID. I also asked
that additional options ( for example dual PSUs, lights-out cards,
backups, and managed firewall services) be quoted as additional options
if they had the flexibility.

Some of the quotes are marked as confidential, so I can't distribute

them on the public mailing list. I will be making them available in an
obscure directory as a password protected zipfile on my personal
website; if you are interested in seeing them, please email me and I'll
send you the location and password offline. In the zipfile, each quote
and supporting documentation (including follow up clarifications I asked
for) is in its own directory.

Here's my initial analysis...

- EasyStreet looks like a good solution, but the price seems high for

the hardware/bandwidth compared to the other providers.

- HE's hardware isn't high-end (and they don't offer higher levels),

but bandwidth costs are reasonable and scaling out to additional servers
is relatively inexpensive. I like that the bandwidth is unbundled from
the hardware maintenance; it allows us to grow either processing
capacity or traffic independently.

- PEER1 seems to offer good value and great hardware, bandwidth is

metered by total so spikes can't ruin our whole month, and they have
additional services like managed firewall and daily offsite backups.
Their quote didn't include setup fees (may be able to get them waived).

I really welcome your feedback on this. We need to avoid talking

specific prices or otherwise giving away the details of the quotes on
the public email list. I think that the best approach might be if I
start a massive CC list as you email me for the quote info.

Jason

4

Tyler Mitchell wrote:

What's next to get this done. Jason - is there something I can help with on this or do you just need to finalise their bid?

Any of the other SAC members have an opinion on the bids?

I am +1 on PEER1.

Folks,

The cost of the Peer1 quote does exceed the amount indicated in the original
transition plan document, and that was the basis of the board authorization
to proceed with the hosting. So, I'd like to encourage Jason and Bob to
bring forward a hosting proposal to the board meeting this Friday.

If we should commit to a multi-year arrangement this should also be noted.

The motion can be added to this Friday's board meeting agenda:

   http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/Twenty_First_Board_Meeting

Something along the lines of "Motion to authorize Tyler to sign a three year
hosting contract with Peer1 for up to $14000USD/year".

If you still aren't certain whether to include the firewall and tape backup
options, then request authorization for enough to cover them and then decide.
I'm personally -0 on the hardware firewall, and see a clear need for *some*
sort of backup solution but hopefully the experts will bring forward a
proposal based on my than my meagre understanding of these issues.

I'd suggest that either Tyler or Gary sign any official contract on behalf
of OSGeo for the hosting.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

5

Tyler,

Before we start renegotiation's with a vendor I want our Sysadmin to review the proposals. This should happen late this week. In the mean time it would be great to have input from the SAC membership.

Bob

Tyler Mitchell wrote:

What's next to get this done. Jason - is there something I can help with on this or do you just need to finalise their bid?

Any of the other SAC members have an opinion on the bids?

I am +1 on PEER1.

Tyler

On 6-Nov-06, at 8:24 AM, Jason Birch wrote:

I don't see any huge downside.

The packages look good, and PEER1 itself seems to have a good
reputation.

Would it be a reasonable use of Telascience's kindly shared resources to
set up downloads.osgeo.org there, and use that host for file
distribution?

I'm not sure that we have a lot to worry about, but it might make sense
to set this up from the start?

Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Bray
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 21:44
To: sac@sac.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [SAC] Server host quotes

Jason,

From looking at the details I am leaning toward Peer1. Am I missing
something? It almost seems to good.

Bob

Jason Birch wrote:

Hi all,

I've got the three quotes back along with some clarifications. I

asked initially for quotes on configurations including two servers that
had at least dual core or dual-cpu, 2Gb memory, and RAID. I also asked
that additional options ( for example dual PSUs, lights-out cards,
backups, and managed firewall services) be quoted as additional options
if they had the flexibility.

Some of the quotes are marked as confidential, so I can't distribute

them on the public mailing list. I will be making them available in an
obscure directory as a password protected zipfile on my personal
website; if you are interested in seeing them, please email me and I'll
send you the location and password offline. In the zipfile, each quote
and supporting documentation (including follow up clarifications I asked
for) is in its own directory.

Here's my initial analysis...

- EasyStreet looks like a good solution, but the price seems high for

the hardware/bandwidth compared to the other providers.

- HE's hardware isn't high-end (and they don't offer higher levels),

but bandwidth costs are reasonable and scaling out to additional servers
is relatively inexpensive. I like that the bandwidth is unbundled from
the hardware maintenance; it allows us to grow either processing
capacity or traffic independently.

- PEER1 seems to offer good value and great hardware, bandwidth is

metered by total so spikes can't ruin our whole month, and they have
additional services like managed firewall and daily offsite backups.
Their quote didn't include setup fees (may be able to get them waived).

I really welcome your feedback on this. We need to avoid talking

specific prices or otherwise giving away the details of the quotes on
the public email list. I think that the best approach might be if I
start a massive CC list as you email me for the quote info.

Jason