IDEA: It might be smart to talk to other hackerspaces and see if they would act as an encrypted backup for us if we do the same.
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Justin Herman <just...@gmail.com> wrote: > SynHak.org needs to be multiple things. A "playground" maybe should not be > what we use it for. I don't use the plumbing or electric as a "playground" > they are infrastructure. They are constructs. > > Instead of asking why AWS is the best, I should have asked what are the > goals? > > As far as physical security it had been discussed (for the build working > group) that security be put in place around the primary infrastructure. You > mention a javelin and/or beer but what stops someone from doing that right > now to some of our other precious items (3d printer)? Members. We vet our > members though our membership process. Non of our members have malicious > intentions. If they do we have processes in place to remove them. And if > something catastrophic happens what risk are we at? What could not be > backed up and re-implemented? Implementing backup procedures would be > important. We all have tolerated outages in the past. A few days of outage > for our wiki or spiff is that worth 4 months as a member? We could offsite > host a semi static page for little to no cost. If 48 summit goes off-line > no guests would be the wiser. > > With regards to migration I suggest virtualization. Pick your flavor: > Proxmox, Hyper-v, ZEN, ESXi. (I can donate a essentials plus license for > ESXi if needed) or something else. Then rebuild using git. > > I don't love TWC but I see this as turning point. A time to re-evaluate. > > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Torrie Fischer > <tdfisc...@hackerbots.net>wrote: > >> On Monday, March 03, 2014 12:32:48 Justin Herman wrote: >> > As far as reimbursement and membership credit I have submitted them. >> >> *nod* >> >> Its in my backlog. >> >> > >> > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Justin Herman <just...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > > My question is why no other options viable for hosting? >> > > >> > > Why MUST we use AWS? Why do we need 99.99 availability for 6 servers? >> Why >> > > could we not hybrid the design (like Craig said) and use some local >> > > hosting >> > > and some AWS? >> > > >> > > Hardware is cheap and easy to come by. Hosting our own allows us to >> have a >> > > TON more CPU and RAM and storage. It something like >> spiff/wiki/fileserver >> > > due to hardware failure, upgrade needs, network connection... we could >> > > always but a static page for our contact info so it doesn't seem like >> we >> > > fell off the face of the internet. >> > > >> > > If we want to have a class on AWS by all means fire up a demo site. >> That >> > > has nothing to do with our production infrastructure. >> > > >> > > I know we all want more internet and lots of people SAY TWC is >> unreliable >> > > but I haven't seen anything saying HOW unreliable at the 48 Summit >> space >> > > it >> > > is. Are we down or frequent outages? Not getting promised service >> <BW>? >> > > Excessive packet loss? Are we taking metrics? >> > > >> > > And if TWC is that bad WHY was it chosen to use them? >> > > >> > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Craig Bergdorf <mm1...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> or, if it's $200 and you know for a fact the space needs it right >> now, >> > >> just grudgingly buy it and hold mild anger towards those that said it >> > >> wasn't needed (sorry, in a mood). Unless (crosses fingers) this is >> meant >> > >> as a way to test a new, functional system for the space approving >> > >> purchases, if so: >> > >> >> > >> Is there a budget for the space that includes consumables like toilet >> > >> paper that any member is allowed to see / comment on? What >> percentage of >> > >> the remainder of that does this $200 represent? >> > >> >> > >> As I mentioned before, I think this is a great idea, and the lower >> price >> > >> tag just makes it better. I also have mentioned we should be paying >> more >> > >> for internet so we can supplement our real host with some old >> fashioned >> > >> house file servers (and a webcam/open sign/phone that doesn't >> require so >> > >> much maintenance). >> > >> >> > >> If a call for comments is up, my only concern is one of not knowing >> if >> > >> the amount we have for monthly improvements has included all the >> > >> consumables I would think higher priority (such as toilet paper). I >> am >> > >> also surprised that there is a penny left in this fund after 2 >> months of >> > >> building. >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Torrie Fischer < >> tdfisc...@hackerbots.net >> > >> >> > >> > wrote: >> > >>> On Monday, March 03, 2014 11:35:51 Justin Herman wrote: >> > >>> > I agree with Andrew, >> > >>> > >> > >>> > I hold several concerns about this proposal and think we need to >> > >>> >> > >>> evaluate >> > >>> >> > >>> > the needs of the infrastructure. >> > >>> >> > >>> If you've got "several concerns", what are those concerns? I too can >> > >>> claim to >> > >>> be "concerned" about something and not actually say why. >> > >>> >> > >>> Instead of doing any useful synhak work today or tomorrow, I'll be >> > >>> producing a >> > >>> technical report that shows why this investment will benefit the >> hacker >> > >>> community we aim to support. >> > >>> >> > >>> > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Andrew Buczko >> > >>> >> > >>> <a4s...@dsprototyping.com>wrote: >> > >>> > > WAT? >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > first you said it was $1.60 >> > >>> > > Then $16.40 >> > >>> > > Now it's $123.10 >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > ? >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 11:09 AM, Torrie Fischer >> > >>> >> > >>> <tdfisc...@hackerbots.net>wrote: >> > >>> > >> Previous thread: >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> https://synhak.org/pipermail/discuss/2014-February/003393.html >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> I'd like to propose that we spend $200 to reserve the two >> t1.micro >> > >>> > >> instances >> > >>> > >> in that proposal for the purpose of web servers. >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> Our current AWS expenditure is still ~$80/mo. Spending $200 up >> > >>> >> > >>> front will >> > >>> >> > >>> > >> reduce that bill by $16.40/mo and keep our infrastructure >> expenses >> > >>> >> > >>> low >> > >>> >> > >>> > >> for the >> > >>> > >> next three years. Thats an extra $16.40 we can invest elsewhere >> > >>> >> > >>> with a >> > >>> >> > >>> > >> break >> > >>> > >> even point of 12 months. >> > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >>> > >> Discuss mailing list >> > >>> > >> Discuss@synhak.org >> > >>> > >> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > >>> > > >> > >>> > > _______________________________________________ >> > >>> > > Discuss mailing list >> > >>> > > Discuss@synhak.org >> > >>> > > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > >>> >> > >>> _______________________________________________ >> > >>> Discuss mailing list >> > >>> Discuss@synhak.org >> > >>> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> Discuss mailing list >> > >> Discuss@synhak.org >> > >> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> Discuss@synhak.org >> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@synhak.org https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
