The Disk Cleaning & Sanitization issue:

Recently a growing number of customers have been asking us to help them SANITIZE their disks after they retire their storage equipment. We do this with our proprietary solution for a daily on site rate, because we can never tell going in how many hours it will take to cleanse all the disks in the FC arrays. I hope to have a forum on this during the next Disaster Recovery conference, because I am not the only one who considers the possibility of private data getting into the wrong hands a disaster!

The Wikipedia actually has very good summary of the problem and this piece is really interesting to many customers we speak with:

The bad track problem

A compromise of sensitive data may occur if media is released when an addressable segment of a storage device (such as unusable or “bad” tracks in a disk drive or inter-record gaps in tapes) is not receptive to an overwrite. As an example, a disk platter may develop unusable tracks or sectors; however, sensitive data may have been previously recorded in these areas. It may be difficult to overwrite these unusable tracks. Before sensitive information is written to a disk, all unusable tracks, sectors, or blocks should be identified (mapped). During the life cycle of a disk, additional unusable areas may be identified. If this occurs and these tracks cannot be overwritten, then sensitive information may remain on these tracks. In this case, overwriting is not an acceptable purging method and the media should be degaussed or destroyed.

Here are two links that address the issues :
http://www.hipaadvisory.com/tech/disksan.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_remanence

What is your corporate policy on excess equipment and disk sanitization?

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

The Small Business perspective and a Goliath’s

Last night I was reading the Wall Street Journal of June 6th 2006, and on page B5 there is an article by Gwendolyn Bounds about how an independent radio station in Philadelphia maintains its market leadership under private ownership. The article ends with this statement by the station’s owner ‘ Whenever there’s a decision to be made, I ask myself two questions: “will I make money in the next 12 months?’ and ” will I make money in 5 years?” ‘ In the spirit of someone without public shareholders to consider, Mr Lee adds ” The five-year one is the only one that matters” 🙂

While I was in Tampa last week I got into a discussion about how a small business like Zerowait can compete against a large leviathan like NetApp for service and support of Legacy NetApp equipment. I tried to explain that because we are small means that we can discuss tactical and strategic ideas between our departments and make decisions quickly based on our customer’s requests and emerging requirements. But the reality is much simpler, ask your NetApp, Hitachi, or EMC salesman and management what their five year expectation is for his employment and the duty cycle of their products. Then call Zerowait and compare the answer, Zerowait is always working toward the strategic five year time frame, while most Enterprise storage manufacturers are looking at the quarterly sales figures.

Mr Lee summed up my thoughts beautifully on our business.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Strategic and tactical thinking about your storage infrastructure.

When you consider your enterprise storage strategic plan do you consider a ROI of three years, or five years? What does your vendor consider the term of their strategic alliance to be? What happens to your service and support budget and QOS if your chosen vendors’ agreement falls apart with their suddenly not so strategic partner? What happens if a vendor cancels support after 18 months for the product you just purchased?

Many enterprise storage companies face this problem, and when the vendors say that the only choice is to upgrade and spend even more money, and get an even more proprietary solution, customers often agree to the upgrade because they see no other solution. But there are other viable solutions, and avoiding vendor lock in is an enterprise customer’s best defense.

I was at a conference recently in Tampa, and I was speaking to some managers of big data centers, every one of them was interested in how to avoid vendor lock in. Each of them had a nightmare story about their storage vendor and hidden lock in costs. We had a great discussion about the different tactics there are to fight vendor lock in. Fighting vendor lock in starts at the negotiations stage, but it is very important that you add addendum’s to the vendor’s RTU (Right To Use) license agreement and also make certain your PO reflects the special changes you want starting with the right to a transferable license and the right to use third party support without any changes to your warranty. Tactically you can save tens of thousands of dollars at purchase, but strategically you can save hundreds of thousands by negotiating aggressively with your storage manufacturer.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

NetApp & IBM agreements

We get a lot of calls from customers who are trying to figure out how to get the best deal on NetApp equipment and we advise them to shop around. The agreement between NetApp and IBM provides a way to negotiate a better deal on your new NetApp equipment’s because now you have two competing manufacturer sales forces offering identical equipment. Since both sales forces have to meet their quotas a savvy customer can play them against each other.
Additionally each company has a reseller channel which can also be contacted to get quotes from.

Since both NetApp and IBM are offering NetApp software and support services, there is no differentiation in product or service other than price. It is very similar to going between different car dealers and negotiating.

I recommend some caution in purchasing the IBM branded equipment because NetApp in the past had a similar OEM agreement with Dell. But when it fell apart the Dell customers were left without support. As the article shows IBM just discontinued its last NAS head, how long will it be before they discontinue support for the NetApp brand?

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

During last week’s Disaster recovery Summit in Tampa I was surprised to see so few storage vendors and storage resellers. I would have expected to see a whole bunch of Storage resellers at the conference, since recovering data is such an important part of Business Continuity. It seemed very odd, although the attendees were probably very happy not to see them. Zerowait was the only storage support and services company in attendence, and I was the only non- manufacturer on the panel discussions.

In a strange coincidence today in a press release by Tech Data anouncing their NetApp distribution agreement they say: “Whether it’s ensuring critical data is accessible in case of disaster or complying with regulations that mandate increased digital document retention, businesses of all sizes are turning to IT resellers to develop innovative, cost-effective storage solutions,” said Pete Peterson, Tech Data’s vice president, Systems Product Marketing.

Tech data is in Clearwater and the conference was in Tampa, at the Airport Marriott. If Data Availalbility in the face of a disaster is so important to Tech Data and NetApp, I wonder why they did not drive over the bridge to the conference? It would have been a great opportunity for them to introduce their new product.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

The 2006 Disaster recovery Summit is history now and it was the best conference I have ever attended. And here is why:
1) Attendees were really interested in the topics.
2) End user experiences were clear,enlightening and well presented.
3) Vendors were not allowed to give their standard powerpoint commercials.
4) When Vendors made unverifiable claims, Toigo questioned them on their statements.
5) After conference dinner party was outstanding .

And for Zerowait, we found a lot more customers who are interested in our service and support offerings.

I wish other conferences were as well run, focused and informative.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Disaster recovery or disaster prevention?

This week there is a conference in Tampa about preventing a catastrophic loss of data. Although the conference’s focus is based on FEMA types of events, every enterprise needs to be aware of the costs of lost data.

Companies in this market niche break down the possibility of disaster and the recovery of data into as many facets as there are in a prism. The daily concerns of data deliverability to your customer or clients desktops and the security of the data so data does not end up on your competitors desktop breaks down into a few specific areas.

Network security and vulnerability – Can your users access data easily while preventing unauthorized viewers from seeing your data?

Data tape storage vulnerability- Is your off site tape vault secure or are there vulnerabilities to tape loss and theft in the process.

End of Life of Disk and subsystems – How does your company dispose of disks at the end of life or end of lease of your storage subsystems? Some of our customers keep all of their disks at the end of lease but this is very costly, but many are uncertain as to how to clean disks before returning them or disposing them.

At Zerowait we are recognized for providing High Availability networking services & storage services to our customers, so many of our customers have adopted our thoughts on disaster prevention instead of disaster recovery. Using a combination load balancing switches, VPN’s and data mirroring we keep our data in two separate locations, and many of our customers do the same thing now. It really does not cost any more than implementing a D/R site and strategy, and the advantages during data migrations and network changes are numerous. But a Secure VPN between multiple locations introduces a whole new set of issues about virtual site location security.

Some of our customers have been the targets of the tape loss scandals that have recently been covered in the media and it should come as no surprise that these losses occur, in a competitive environment the low cost provider will win some business, but to lower their costs they must forgo some security. You get what you pay for. Implementing a Disaster prevention site strategy could have prevented these data loss stories from hitting the media.

Recently many customers been asking us to help them clean their disks. When using a subsystem like NetApp there are a whole bunch of challenges to doing this. And this has become a growing part of our business. But at the lowest common denominator you want to be certain that there is no visible proprietary data on your disks when you are done with them.

I hope to cover some of this during my time on the panel discussion at the conference, and I hope to see you there.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

“Extraordinary Claims require extraordinary proof” Carl Sagan

When it comes to reliability and uptime there is no doubt that NetApp has some of the most remarkably stable storage equipment in the marketplace. It is not unusual to have customers that have uptimes of three and four years. This unblemished reliability is what is so remarkable about the NetApp F700 series in particular. And since NetApp is ending support for these units why so many customers are coming to Zerowait for their continuing F700 parts replacement & support.

Over the last several months NetApp customers have been coming to us to support their F820’s, F840’s , F880’s R100’s and R150’s also, and now we are are starting to take over support of the FAS900 sereis also.

If you love your NetApp’s but are looking for an affordable alternative for your ongoing parts support, why not give us a call – 302.266.9408? We have hundeds of filers under parts support and are adding many more every week.

Have a great holiday weekend!

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Has NetApp peaked ?
Server storage company Network Appliance Inc. announced Wednesday that its fiscal 2006 fourth quarter net income dropped 6.6 percent.

Our company has seen a surge in our support business over the last year and as many NetApp legacy companies look for more affordable alternatives to NetApp’s service, support, and upgrade business. Currently we are finalizing our discussions to set up our European service division which should happen in the next 60 days.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

He should have called Zerowait for his NetApp support!

NetApp’s midrange storage quality up for debate
By Beth Pariseau, News Writer
22 May 2006 | SearchStorage.com

It may have been a blow to Network Appliance Inc. (NetApp) that its traditional sweet spot, enterprise NAS, went to Hitachi Data Systems Inc. in Storage magazine’s most recent Quality Awards survey. (See HDS wins enterprise NAS, May 3.) But NetApp still made a strong showing in midrange NAS among survey respondents, a fact which baffled one midrange user who heard the results of the survey announced by Storage editors during last week’s Storage Decisions conference.

“I was amazed when I saw that rating,” said Nick Suranyi of Press Ganey Associates, which processes patient satisfaction surveys for hospitals and healthcare providers.

Ganey has 20 terabytes of NetApp midrange filers and needs to add about 20 more terabytes of storage this year as new regulations in many states are forcing healthcare providers to conduct the kind of surveys Suranyi ‘s company stores and processes. Suranyi himself said he is new to the company and inherited the FAS270s, R100s and FAS810s that compose most of Ganey’s environment.

“We’re seeing disk failures running rampant across every one of our filers,” Suranyi said. “We’ve had disks failing as often as two or three times a week — now it’s down to about once every three weeks, but for awhile there my desk was like shipping and receiving with replacement disks coming in.” Some of the crashes, he said, have resulted in data loss and system corruptions requiring more repair than simply replacing one drive.

Suranyi said he is confident he’s ruled out a version problem with his OnTap OS, or a problem with his environment in part by comparing notes with former colleagues and acquaintances in a test lab at Notre Dame University located in Indiana.

“I’m pretty sure, at this point, there’s something wrong with the way NetApp’s filers identify which disks are failed,” he said.
*****Perhaps he could use our ZHA Exception reporter?*****

And, he said, even if configuration problems were causing disks to crash, he’d never seen it happen so often or with such disruptive results.

“I’ve had Dell [Inc.] DA PowerVault 220s running for three years without seeing a failed disk,” he said.

Worse, he said, when the disk fails, if the filer does not detect a spare, it shuts the entire array down. And NetApp has repeatedly failed to meet its service level agreements (SLA) in response to the drive failures, often taking as much as three times the four-hour agreement time to deliver and install a new drive.

“When I complained to NetApp about it,” Suranyi said, “they told me the shutdown of the array was a feature to force me to protect the data better. And their only response about failing to meet the SLA was to do it again.”

He shook his head. “I couldn’t believe it. And how are they No. 1 in the midrange when they have all these problems? These are midrange filers we’re using.”

Suranyi said he plans to replace the NetApp filers completely this year with a SAN, probably from Xiotech Corp.

Meanwhile, however, Suranyi was overheard by James Jancewicz, storage administrator for a large health insurance provider based in New England, who asked that his company not be named.

“We love NetApp,” he chimed in. “It’s very transparent from the user’s perspective,” but he admitted that his company does see disk failures about once a month. “But six drives a quarter in half a petabyte isn’t all that bad, and we can fix it quickly,” Janceqicz said.

“To me, that many drive failures is unacceptable for an array,” said Suranyi.

“We also have yet to do a code upgrade on NetApp,” Jancewicz also conceded. “Whenever we buy a NetApp box, we just leave it there. We’ve had some of their boxes for three years without touching them.”

Jancewicz added, he’d received “very good support” from NetApp in general, a comment that surprised Suranyi.

“Look at what kind of company he works for, though,” said Bonnie Reif of LaPorte Hospital, herself an EMC user, pointing to the household name on Jancewicz’s conference name badge.

“That’s why it’s strange that they won for the midrange,” Suranyi said. “I had worked for some value-added resellers before that were also bigger and never experienced these problems.”

NetApp did not return calls for comment by press time.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on