We have had to do several 'saves' like this for similar issues, we have used a variety solutions but it sounds like the easiest thing for you would be to create a new domain. The problem with this, or any other solution, short of restoring all data prior to June 15th and then archiving it again, is that you will have data after June 15th, this could be a real issue with your customers legal console. But I think once you explain the difficulties and huge difference in admin costs, they should come around, like ours did.
We have created the new domain like you suggested and we built one management class, the default (named "Forever_retain"), with all 4 parameters set to 'nolimit'. When you move a node into this domain, the node will not be able to find ANY of it's previous defined management classes, assuming you don't currently have a class named "Forever_retain", and will forced to use the default and therefore not expire any data on the node. This of course is the easiest and quickest, it however does create some issues, if you continue to backup to this node, all future files will be bound to the forever retention. I would suggest you create a new node in the current domain for continued backups, it just means you have 2 places for possible future restores. You can move this node back to the original domain once the legal issues are resolved and if the original management classes still exist, data will once again expire according to them. That helps a little. Or you can simply decide the data is obsolete and delete the whole node. Ryan Miller Principal Financial Group Tivoli Certified Consultant Tivoli Storage Manager v4.1 -----Original Message----- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sam Sheppard Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 11:07 AM To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Retention Request Problem Our main customer is having some potential legal problems and has made the following request: "I am requesting that all File Server Backups taken prior to June 15, 2005 be preserved pending further instructions." My immediate response was 'easier said than done'. I'm not clear on what the effect would be of changing the retention policies of retain extra and retain only copy to 'nolimit'. I'm assuming such a change would affect all existing inactive copies and prevent them from rolling off. Or would it only affect subsequent backups? Also, since all clients in a domain are not necessarily going to be under this edict (I find out later this morning), could I create a new domain with 'nolimit' policy, move the affected clients to it and expect the new policy (same management class name) to be picked up by the inactive files on the next backup? I'm hoping that after today's meeting where the difficulties of complying to this kind of 'get in your time machine and make a June 15 archive' request are made clear that I won't have the problem. But I can't be sure. At minimum, I'm hoping that the scope can be limited since we're talking over 200 clients and 4-5 TB of data. Thanks Sam Sheppard San Diego Data Processing Corp. (858)-581-9668 -----Message Disclaimer----- This e-mail message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by reply email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete or destroy all copies of the original message and attachments thereto. Email sent to or from the Principal Financial Group or any of its member companies may be retained as required by law or regulation. Nothing in this message is intended to constitute an Electronic signature for purposes of the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) or the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act ("E-Sign") unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this message.