Snips from post
> From: Gerard Nicol <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Storage of tapes and other media
> I know it must be frustrating to live in a world of cardboard boxes but
> pleading with people to reply seems a little desperate.
Larry was merely asking members of this List to reply to your questions.
Too often when a respected voice like Larry or Peter or Ginny responds
or even Steve who "Hates Paper" the rest of us feel "The question was
and answered sufficiently and this is 'generally' not a "Me too" list.
But show some respect to the members who belong to the list. Many of
carry bona-fide credentials to their knowledge base earned over years of
classes and on the job experience; and in many cases college degrees in
art of records management science.
What you so easily denigrate: " boxes of documents" which are a
"collection of records."
You live in a world where you are surrounded by "tapes" which is just a
collection of records." Only those records lack classification,
retention guidelines and
longevity to survive to the retention schedule required by current laws
and federal rules.
The ability to cram more paper in a box or use a larger box creates no
value in RM, and
I believe that the density that IT craves is the downfall of their
records management program.
It is this failure of IT to perform during litigation that is helping
drive new rules and laws
which IT cannot cope with.
This group manages records beyond a level that Microsoft, Oracle and
IBM can comprehend.
This RM group does not value speed over reliability, or; density over
integrity of the collection.
> So the question still stands, what criteria would a RM use to select an
> off-site vendor for backup tapes?
You ask questions that can easily be researched elsewhere. Read the
web site you referenced.
They outlines the rules you wish to aspire to. Your whole concept, as I
have read it time and again,
is "track the media and if the media makes it offsite and then back
again it is a job well done."
That is not the "whole concept" and an excellent post was provided that
Few in the data storage industry even know what the following citation
> Civil Code Section 1798.82 et seq that requires the vendor to
> and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices appropriate
> to the
> nature of the information, to protect the personal information from
> unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure.”
Or develop a plan on how to salvage the media should some event occur
in the Listserv post
> Provide salvage plan in case of recoverable records - must address who
> pays for 3rd party salvage work
Maureen Cusack provided a wealth of information that describes the
value proposition of
offsite tape storage or records storage in any format, all of which I
am sure you copy
and pasted out for future use with your clientele. You should thank
Larry and Peter and all of this List for educating you rather than
coming back with
> In case people have not been in a data security facility, here is how
> say they do it
I have had records managers tour me through hundreds of records centers
is no mystery here as to what a storage volume of tapes looks like.
The only real
differences I see is that paper will be here in 2107 and the media will
not be; and
if it was still viable, there would be no computer capable of reading
it. IT people
think a migration schedule refers to illegal immigrants. Archimedes
me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will lift the earth!"
philosopher Jerome used to say "Give me a flashlight and a magnifying
and I can read microfilm in the year 3007." (Accuracy subject to follow
by a jury of my peers. :~! )
But all that comes to end now. Rule 26 and EIS requirements issued in
place all new burdens on the data storage industry.
And in one I especially love, they tangle offsite storage as part of
the liability chain. If a
corporation or organization contracts to store computer media and they
can prove the
vendor was negligent, the liability for lost or spoiled data can
transfer. If you say you
protect media then you will need to prove what level of protection you
Although I defer to the intelligencia among us to see if I interpret
So call your media transport container supplier, you need to upgrade,
call the refrigeration
vendor as your vans need to be upgraded. The software for the media
will need to be
upgraded and tied into GPS and that means RFID. Shock watch tags,
video surveillance all take a jump up in status. (If I was Filetrail
RFID and 3M RFID I would
be booking a booth at PRISM. There will be renewed interest.)
If your software for tracking media cannot share a database like Oneil,
DHS then you may be odd man out. NRC has already accomplished this but
some of the
majors cannot track media as it moves from city to city due to
conflicts with overly large
databases? Go figure! If you store data in multiple cities, your
information should be able to move across platforms. Delays in tracking
media will be a
problem. Kudos to NRC for recognizing this early on. I am trying to
move the FAN members
in this same direction and real progress has just been made. All
because these new laws
and rules change the landscape.
> Is that what a RM would want to see?
You ask question after question but I fail to see you imparting any
wisdom back to the List.
Maybe that is why some do not respond to your requests for
enlightenment, or; is it the
satirical tone you take with the List because you think no one here is
worthy of respect. I
can name a hundred names here on this List that are the Deans of the
world who can walk into a Board Room and people listen to them.
So tell us, what information of value do you have to impart to the CEO?
How should he select
his offsite vendor? What should he fear from the Data Storage
community? What is the Gospel
according to Gerard and his software company TapeTrack. Then we can
quit trying to figure out
what you genuinely know and when you are just trying to get us to
respond so you can make
mean comments that are intended to show you are smart and that we are
What should the records management community know, that you think we do
FIRELOCK Fireproof Modular Vaults
[log in to unmask]
(610) 756-4440 Fax (610) 756-4134
This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be
privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any
unauthorized use or dissemination of this message in whole or in part
strictly prohibited. Please note that e-mails are susceptible to
change. Banc Tecnic Inc. dba FIRELOCK shall not be liable for the
improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in
this communication nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your
system. FIRELOCK does not guarantee that the integrity of this
communication has been maintained nor that this communication is free
of viruses, interceptions or interference.
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance