about the immediate ability to refrain expiration.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Richard Rhodes
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 4:39 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
Our approach
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Date: 05/07/2013 03:36 PM
Subject:Re: TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
Sent by:ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Great ideas Paul I'm preparing to build the alternate server without
expiration approach as soon as I can scare up some
.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Skylar
Thompson
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 4:46 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
Unfortunately we've had expiration holds for tens of terabytes
to
rolling off.
W
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Vandeventer, Harold [BS]
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 3:36 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
Great ideas Paul I'm preparing
@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
Great ideas Paul I'm preparing to build the alternate server without
expiration approach as soon as I can scare up some resources.
I'll look at the alternate Domain approach also.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM
Ah, it appears I miss-understood EXACTLY what happens in expiration.
The intent of a litigation is, in my case, to satisfy the instruction from
legal that says: 'keep everything'. That would include versions and days to
retain files going on for an extended time.
So, Wanda, you've blown my
Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Prather, Wanda
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 10:34 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
Just want to clarify something for people who haven't dealt with this before.
It depends on what you mean when you
: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of
Prather, Wanda
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 10:34 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
Just want to clarify something for people who haven't dealt with this before.
It depends on what you
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 12:45 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
I believe the TSM client enforces the # of versions limit specified in the
management class, but not the retention attributes (# of days to keep inactive
versions). Only
]
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 3:06 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
To all...
I created an RFE to affect File Spaces and Expiration. The feature would cause
expiration processing to be skipped for a file space that has been selected.
It's RFE ID 33395
I'd also like to vote this up. We're a research organization so we don't
have litigation per se, but there are times when we need to freeze
expiration for other reasons.
-- Skylar Thompson (skyl...@u.washington.edu)
-- Genome Sciences Department, System Administrator
-- Foege Building S046, (206
.
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] on behalf of Ben Bullock
[bbull...@bcidaho.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 10:59 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
That sounds like a great RFE, one I could have used a couple
Got it. Voted. Thanks
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Reese,
Michael A (Mike) CIV USARMY 93 SIG BDE (US)
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 11:01 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
I
Sure could have used this in the past! Got my vote!
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Ben
Bullock
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 1:06 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
Got it. Voted
Ditto
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Plair,
Ricky
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 12:52 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
Sure could have used this in the past! Got my vote
We deal with a variety of types of litigation hold here, as well. What you can
do now, easily, is to setup a parallel policy domain (i.e., LITHOLD) that has
all the same management classes, but different retention policy (i.e., retain
forever). Then, to avoid expiration you just have to do
Zarnowski
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 12:54 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
We deal with a variety of types of litigation hold here, as well. What you can
do now, easily, is to setup a parallel policy domain (i.e., LITHOLD) that has
all the same
, and
the copy can sit for as long as needed.
Rick
From: Vandeventer, Harold [BS] harold.vandeven...@ks.gov
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Date: 05/07/2013 03:36 PM
Subject:Re: TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
Sent by:ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Great ideas Paul
has lets the node be processed as usual, and
the copy can sit for as long as needed.
Rick
From: Vandeventer, Harold [BS] harold.vandeven...@ks.gov
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Date: 05/07/2013 03:36 PM
Subject:Re: TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
Sent by:ADSM: Dist
allow Expiration Processing to delete information that would otherwise be
deleted. This would be in response to a Litigation Hold demand from a legal
issue at hand. I've had three LitHold events in the past 24 months; they're
not much fun and I'm not in the court room, just the TSM Server
I've just learned about a keep everything issue for 5 of our nodes related to
a pending litigation.
All are Windows servers, running TSM client 6.x, server is TSM 5.5.x.
Default mgmt class is to retain 3 versions, deleted for 30 days.
I'm looking for advice on how to quickly/easily keep all
export node fileda=all
On 26 mrt. 2013, at 22:04, Vandeventer, Harold [BS]
harold.vandeven...@ks.gov wrote:
I've just learned about a keep everything issue for 5 of our nodes related
to a pending litigation.
All are Windows servers, running TSM client 6.x, server is TSM 5.5.x.
Default
for 5 of our nodes
related to a pending litigation.
All are Windows servers, running TSM client 6.x, server is TSM 5.5.x.
Default mgmt class is to retain 3 versions, deleted for 30 days.
I'm looking for advice on how to quickly/easily keep all the files
including historical versions.
My read
Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Prather, Wanda
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 10:50 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Litigation!
5.4 is due out sometime 1st quarter, although still subject to change in
the presentation I saw.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist
PROTECTED] Subject
.EDU Re: Litigation! Wish
12/26/2006 11:58
PM
Please respond to
ADSM: Dist Stor
Manager
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.EDU
, but IMO backupsets are too hard to manage effectively... but then
I haven't really used them that much. Also, backupsets will only contain
active data, and so may be incomplete in a litigation context.
I think the bottom line here, unfortunately, is that we're trying to make
TSM fulfill a need
a copy that has it's own retention
criteria, but IMO backupsets are too hard to manage effectively... but then
I haven't really used them that much. Also, backupsets will only contain
active data, and so may be incomplete in a litigation context.
I think the bottom line here, unfortunately
] On Behalf Of
Robin Sharpe
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 8:55 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Litigation! Wish
Yes, this is a major shortcoming of TSM, especially in today's litigious
business climate: the fact that data retention in TSM is tied to
Management Class/Copy Group, and is the same
cc
Manager
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
.EDU Litigation! Wish
12/20/2006 09:57
AM
Please respond
Added VTL to increase capacity.
Dream wish: set Version Data Exists to 20 for vtlpool and to 2 for
copypool.
No way to accomplish that (there isn't a Santa, after all)?
TIA
Orin Rehorst
University of Illinois at Chicago [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Orin Rehorst
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:05 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Litigation!
Yipes, we have pending litigation
.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Orin Rehorst
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:05 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Litigation!
Yipes, we have pending litigation and an E-discovery.
I've been told to freeze our TDP
Yipes, we have pending litigation and an E-discovery.
I've been told to freeze our TDP for Exchange backups. How do you do
dat? The backups roll off. (Just keeping one backup may be good enough.)
Regards,
Orin
Orin Rehorst
November 2006 14:05
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [SPAM: 4.000] [ADSM-L] Litigation!
Yipes, we have pending litigation and an E-discovery.
I've been told to freeze our TDP for Exchange backups. How do you do
dat? The backups roll off. (Just keeping one backup may be good enough.)
Regards,
Orin
type backups, and bind the COPY backups
to a different management class that solves your longer term
archival needs.
Thanks,
Del
ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU wrote on 11/16/2006
09:04:51 AM:
Yipes, we have pending litigation
type backups, and bind the COPY backups
to a different management class that solves your longer term
archival needs.
Thanks,
Del
ADSM: Dist Stor Manager ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU wrote on 11/16/2006
09:04:51 AM:
Yipes, we have pending litigation
36 matches
Mail list logo
