PDS Physical Media Survey Summary =========================================================================== (1) Respondents: (1) [NC] Nancy Chanover (ATMOS) (2) [LM] Larry Martin (Goddard) (3) [MS] Mark Showalter (RINGS) (4) [BS] Boris Semenov (NAIF) (5) [TS] Thomas Stein (GEO) (6) [AR] Ann Raugh (SBN) (7) [DT] David Tarico (SBN/PSI) (8) [RJ] Raymond Jackson (RS) (9) [RS] Richard Simpson (RS) (10) [BH] Bill Harris (PPI) (11) [CI] Chris Isbell (IMAGING) (2) CD Physical Media (2a) What brand of blank CDs does your node purchase for the purpose of making archival products: [NC] - Memorex, Office Max [LM] - Memorex [MS] - Various, name-brand [BS] - n/a [TS] - MEMOREX [AR] - Whatever is available in the UMD catalog, which varies. Verbatim is usually available with one other name brand - sometimes Sony, sometimes Memorex, sometimes Maxell, etc. [DT] - Imation and Maxtor [RJ] - [RS] - TDK [BH] - Taiyo Yuden [CI] - Kodak, Sony (by Taiyo Yuden) (2b) What CD writing software does your node use: [NC] - GEAR [LM] - Ultraplex 40 Max CD Duplicator [MS] - Roxio Toast [BS] - n/a [TS] - NERO, ROXIO, RECORD NOW [AR] - mkiso under RedHat Linux. Some use the CDRoast graphic interface to this utility [DT] - Various, we haven't found a good one yet [RJ] - [RS] - mkisofs + cdrw [BH] - Nero Burning Rom [CI] - Linux; X-CD-Roast, Windows; DiscJuggler (2c) On what operating system does your node write CDs: [NC] - Unix/Solaris [LM] - [MS] - Mac OS X [BS] - n/a [TS] - WIN XP, WIN 2K3; STANDALONE COPIER [AR] - RedHat Linux AS [DT] - Various, we haven't found a good configuration yet [RJ] - [RS] - Solaris 9 [BH] - Windows XP Professional [CI] - Linux; SuSE 9.0, Windows; XP-Pro (2d) What manufacturer / model of equipment does your node use to write CDs: [NC] - Plextor Plexwriter 12/10/32S [LM] - Palm Star Series CD-99A [MS] - Apple Mac built-in [BS] - n/a [TS] - MULTIPLE (SONY, TEAC, E.G.) [AR] - Dell OEM, Sony, Pioneer, possibly others [DT] - Various, we haven't found a good configuration yet [RJ] - [RS] - PlexWriter 12/10/32s; others [BH] - NEC ND-2100A, Pioneer DVR-109 in duplicators [CI] - Pioneer A05, NEC DVD-RW ND-3520A (2e) Have you had any problems with writing/reading CDs: [NC] - Yes [LM] - No [MS] - Yes [BS] - No [TS] - No [AR] - No [DT] - No [RJ] - Yes [RS] - Yes [BH] - No [CI] - Yes (2f-1) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the MEDIA: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - 3% [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (2f-2) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the WRITER: [NC] - 75% [LM] - [MS] - 0% [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (2f-3) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the SOFTWARE: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - 0% [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (2f-4) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the SPEED: [NC] - 25% [LM] - [MS] - 1% [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (2f-5) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the PROCESS: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - 0% [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (2f-6) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to OTHER: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - I assume failure during write is due to the write speed and failure during verify is due to the media. [BS] - NAIF does not produce any archive volumes on CDs, and does not plan to do so. [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - After start-up losses, we've probably settled into a routine where about 1 in 100 CD's fails to verify; the reasons are not known, but attributing them to "media" problems is probably reasonable. In copying about 100 Taeyo Yuden 10-year-old CD's last year, we found only one that could not be read in the lab. One of our people took the disc home and successfully copied it there. I don't actually recall any other cases in which we tried to read discs years later and had any significant problems. [BH] - Paper labels are BAD! [CI] - Problem source certainty unknown, Historically, we have had minimal problems with CDs. Node has not purchased CDs in several years. Using existing in-house CD stock. See addtional comments in 9 below. We have used other h/w & sytems over the years but I list only current usage. (3) DVD Physical Media (3a) What brand of blank DVDs does your node purchase for the purpose of making archival products: [NC] - Memorex, Office Max [LM] - Maxell [MS] - Various, name-brand [BS] - n/a [TS] - MEMOREX [AR] - Whatever is available in the UMD catalog - same as for CDs [DT] - Imation and Maxtor [RJ] - TDK [RS] - Only TDK now; early in our DVD life, we also bought Verbatim [BH] - Taiyo Yuden, Verbatim [CI] - Verbatim & Taiyo Yuden (3b) What DVD writing software does your node use: [NC] - Surfburner [LM] - Disk Makers [MS] - Roxio Toast [BS] - n/a [TS] - NERO, ROXIO, RECORD NOW [AR] - growisofs under RedHat Linux [DT] - Various, we haven't found a good one yet [RJ] - Disk Juggler, Roxio [RS] - Padus DiscJuggler V4.60 [BH] - Nero Burning Rom [CI] - Windows; DiscJuggler (3c) On what operating system does your node write DVDs: [NC] - Unix/Solaris [LM] - Disk Makers [MS] - Mac OS X [BS] - n/a [TS] - WIN XP, WIN 2K3; STANDALONE COPIER [AR] - RedHat Linux AS [DT] - Various, we haven't found a good configuration yet [RJ] - Windows XP [RS] - Windows XP [BH] - Windows XP Professional [CI] - Windows: XP-Pro (3d) What manufacturer / model of equipment does your node use to write DVDs: [NC] - Surfstor DVD +/- RW [LM] - ReflexPro 4 DVD Duplicator [MS] - Apple Mac built-in [BS] - n/a [TS] - MULTIPLE [AR] - Dell OEM, Sony, Pioneer [DT] - Various, we haven't found a good configuration yet [RJ] - Plextor [RS] - Plextor PX-712A [BH] - NEC ND-2100A, Pioneer DVR-109 in duplicators [CI] - Pioneer A05, NEC DVD-RW ND-3520A (3e) Have you had any problems with writing/reading DVDs: [NC] - Yes [LM] - Yes [MS] - Yes [BS] - No [TS] - No [AR] - Yes [DT] - Yes [RJ] - Yes [RS] - Yes [BH] - Yes [CI] - Yes (3f-1) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the MEDIA: [NC] - [LM] - 5% [MS] - 10% [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - 90% [DT] - ? [RJ] - 20% [RS] - [BH] - 40% [CI] - (3f-2) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the WRITER: [NC] - [LM] - 48% [MS] - 0% [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - 0% [DT] - ? [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - 40% [CI] - (3f-3) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the SOFTWARE: [NC] - 100% (had to switch from GEAR to Surfburner) [LM] - 47% [MS] - 0% [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - 10% [DT] - ? [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - 0% [CI] - (3f-4) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the SPEED: [NC] - [LM] - 4X [MS] - 0% [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - 0% [DT] - ? [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - 20% [CI] - (3f-5) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the PROCESS: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - 0% [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - 0% [DT] - ? [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - 0% [CI] - (3f-6) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to OTHER: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - On at least one occasion an entire spindle of discs was bad and would fail during write. More commonly the write completes but we encounter an error during verify. [BS] - NAIF has not so far produced any archive volumes on DVDs. We anticipate using electronic delivery to the NSSDC and to whatever site is selected as NAIF's backup, when these processes are firmed up. All of our on-line data reside on a RAID 3 system. [TS] - MIX OF DVD+R AND DVD-R; DO NOT USE RW MEDIA [AR] - One CPU has a tendency to hang in the middle of writing DVDs - possibly user error. Not reproducible. [DT] - We purchased a DVD burner but have had problems find a combination of software and hardware that it would work on reliably. On one data set, the burn process repeatedly failed and we were unable to burn DVDs of the data set. We don't know what caused the problems. [RJ] - 80% - Failing drive in verifier system [RS] - The verification failure rate is higher for DVD's than for CD's; but we recently (yesterday) replaced the reader used in the cerification process and the error rate (and failure rate) suddenly dropped to zero. So it's probably not fair to point an accusing finger at ANYTHING on the writing side. However, we just bought a stack of 100 TDK DVD-R blanks and the first three attempts failed when the WRITER reported it could not execute a command at the end of generation process. This may be a media incompatability problem; but we have not been able to discover what the difference is between DVD+R and DVD-R, so don't know why the latter has failed. DVD-R seems to be OK on my G4 PowerBook, but I don't use that for writing PDS archival volumes. [BH] - most recent issues with DVD writing were related to Verbatim and generic media having write errors on Pioneer drives and at higher speeds [CI] - Although we have had overall success with DVD, there are some unanswered concerns. The main issue (in my opinion (CIsbell)) is that it is difficult for local producers/users to discern the precise problem (categories above). That is, without expensive and specialized analyzer sw/hw, you may not know whether a problem lies with the media, writer, reader, etc. Note additional comments in 9 below. (4) Data Brick (4a) Has your node purchased one or more Data Bricks: [NC] - No [LM] - No [MS] - No [BS] - No [TS] - Yes [AR] - Yes [DT] - No [RJ] - No [RS] - No [BH] - No [CI] - Yes (4b) If yes, how many Data Bricks: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - > 5 [AR] - 1, assuming "data brick" means any large (>100Gb) capacity removable drive [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - 2 (4c) If yes, what manufacturer(s) / model(s) / data capacity (MBytes): [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - WESTERN DIGITAL 200GB AND 300GB [AR] - Seagate 300Gb external hard drive [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - ? (~80G), not sure at time of this survey ... can update in 1-2 days (4d) Have you had any problems writing, transporting or reading the data brick: [NC] - No [LM] - Yes [MS] - No [BS] - No [TS] - Yes [AR] - Yes [DT] - Yes [RJ] - N/A [RS] - N/A [BH] - No [CI] - No (4e-1) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the MEDIA: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - 0% [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (4e-2) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the WRITER: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - 100% [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (4e-3) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the SOFTWARE/OS: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - 100% [AR] - 0% [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (4e-4) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the TRANSPORT: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - 0% [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (4e-5) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to the PROCESS: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - 0% [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (4e-6) If so, What percentage of problem(s) were related to OTHER: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - [TS] - 1. ON RED HAT, BRICK DOES NOT HAVE SAME PROPERTIES AS OTHER FIXED DISK MEDIA, SO THERE ARE PROBLEMS UNZIPPING AND UNTARRING LARGE (> 2 GB) FILES FROM BRICK 2. DISKS WRITTEN ON VARYING O/S CAN BE A CHALLENGE TO READ [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - We have utilized DBrick delivery for at least one project delivery (MGS-MOC). The process has worked OK but we prefer network transfer over DBrick. (5) Media Refresh / Review (5a) Does your node periodically review the media that your node curates: [NC] - Yes [LM] - Yes [MS] - No [BS] - No [TS] - No [AR] - No [DT] - Yes [RJ] - Yes [RS] - Yes [BH] - No [CI] - No (5b) Does your node have a policy in place which stipulates procedures for periodically reviewing the media that your nodes curates: [NC] - No [LM] - No [MS] - No [BS] - No [TS] - No [AR] - No [DT] - No [RJ] - No [RS] - No [BH] - No [CI] - No (5c-1) If so, When was the policy established: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (5c-2) If so, What is the review period for each type of media: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (5c-3) If so, How many hours do you forsee to periodically enforce the policy: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (5c-4) If so, Briefly describe your Node policy: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - All data are on line, typically RAID 5, with geographically distributed backup copies. [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (5d) Does your node periodically refresh the media that your node curates: [NC] - No [LM] - Yes [MS] - No [BS] - No [TS] - Yes [AR] - No [DT] - Yes [RJ] - No [RS] - No [BH] - No [CI] - No (5e-1) If so, Briefly describe the process/tool(s) that are used to verify the integrity of the media: [NC] - [LM] - The media is ran on the approprate machines (i.e.9 track drive, 4 or 8 mm drives, 3480 drive and DLT drive, media is copied and results compaired to the orginal with respect to files, blocks and size [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - CRC CHECKSUMS [AR] - [DT] - MD5 Checksums [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (5e-2) If so, What percentage of refresh includes transferring data to the same type of media: [NC] - [LM] - It all depends on the media type, will it be supported in the future [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - 85% [AR] - [DT] - 100% [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (5e-3) What percentage of refresh includes transfering data to a different type of media; such as, next generation or alternate technology: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - 15% [AR] - [DT] - 0% [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (5f) Does your node have a policy in place which stipulates procedures for periodically refreshing the media that your node curates: [NC] - No [LM] - Yes [MS] - No [BS] - No [TS] - No [AR] - No [DT] - No [RJ] - No [RS] - No [BH] - No [CI] - No (5g-1) If so, When was the policy established: [NC] - [LM] - New policy is in work [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (5g-2) If so, What is the refresh period for each type of media: [NC] - [LM] - media will be refreshed every 6 years [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (5g-3) If so, How many FTEs do you forsee to periodically enforce the policy: [NC] - [LM] - this is still being determined [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - (5g-4) If so, Briefly describe your Node policy: [NC] - [LM] - That all types of media will be refreshed every 6 years [MS] - [BS] - n/a [TS] - [AR] - [DT] - [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - [CI] - Imaging recognizes the need to implement migration/refresh plans for IN data holdings. (6) Future Use of Technology (6a) Over the next few years, do you see your node's use of CD technology: [NC] - decreasing [LM] - increasing [MS] - staying the same [BS] - staying the same [TS] - decreasing [AR] - staying the same [DT] - staying the same [RJ] - increasing [RS] - decreasing [BH] - [CI] - decreasing (6b) Over the next few years, do you see your node's use of DVD technology: [NC] - increasing [LM] - increasing [MS] - staying the same [BS] - staying the same [TS] - staying the same [AR] - increasing [DT] - increasing [RJ] - increasing [RS] - staying the same [BH] - [CI] - staying the same (6c) Over the next few years, do you see your node's use of Data Brick technology: [NC] - increasing [LM] - staying the same [MS] - increasing [BS] - staying the same [TS] - increasing [AR] - staying the same [DT] - staying the same [RJ] - increasing [RS] - increasing [BH] - [CI] - staying the same (7) Procurement With respect to the next two questions, accuracy is desirable but conjecture is acceptable, especially for the outlying years. (7a) Over the last 5 years, what were the equipment / media expenditures for your node: [BS] [DT] [RS] [BH] [CI] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2001 CD Number: | 0 | | 600 | 2700 | 8700 | 2001 CD Cost: | 0 | |$ 500 |$ 1241 |$ 5000 | 2001 DVD Number: | 0 | | | 110 | 60 | 2001 DVD Cost: | 0 | | |$ 1145 |$ 1200 | 2001 Data Bricks Number: | 0 | 0 | | | | 2001 Data Bricks Cost: | 0 | | | | | 2001 Hardware Cost: | 0 | | |$ 3300 | | 2001 Software Cost: | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | 2002 CD Number: | 0 | | 600 | 1000 | 400 | 2002 CD Cost: | 0 | |$ 400 |$ 569 |$ 300 | 2002 DVD Number: | 0 | | | 50 | 500 | 2002 DVD Cost: | 0 | | |$ 245 |$ 2000 | 2002 Data Bricks Number: | 0 | 0 | | | | 2002 Data Bricks Cost: | 0 | | | | | 2002 Hardware Cost: | 0 | | |$ 1000 | | 2002 Software Cost: | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | 2003 CD Number: | 0 | | 600 | 700 | | 2003 CD Cost: | 0 | |$ 300 |$ 266 | | 2003 DVD Number: | 0 | | 50 | 520 | 300 | 2003 DVD Cost: | 0 | |$ 50 |$ 1764 |$ 1200 | 2003 Data Bricks Number: | 0 | 0 | | | | 2003 Data Bricks Cost: | 0 | | | | | 2003 Hardware Cost: | 0 | | |$ 1500 |$ 8000 | 2003 Software Cost: | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | 2004 CD Number: | 0 | | 700 | 2700 | | 2004 CD Cost: | 0 | |$ 300 |$ 1026 | | 2004 DVD Number: | 0 | | 200 | 2110 | 150 | 2004 DVD Cost: | 0 | |$ 200 |$ 2993 |$ 400 | 2004 Data Bricks Number: | 0 | 0 | | | | 2004 Data Bricks Cost: | 0 | | | | | 2004 Hardware Cost: | 0 | | |$ 300 |$ 400 | 2004 Software Cost: | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | 2005 CD Number: | 0 | | 400 | 1500 | | 2005 CD Cost: | 0 | |$ 120 |$ 435 | | 2005 DVD Number: | 0 | | 400 | 1250 | 450 | 2005 DVD Cost: | 0 | |$ 200 |$ 955 |$ 350 | 2005 Data Bricks Number: | 0 | 0 | | | 1 | 2005 Data Bricks Cost: | 0 | | | |$ 300 | 2005 Hardware Cost: | 0 | $100 | |$ 3500 | | 2005 Software Cost: | 0 | $100 | | | | (7b) In the next 4 years, what are the expected equipment / media expenditures for your node: [BS] [DT] [RS] [BH] [CI] -------------------------------------------------------------------- 2006 CD Number: | 0 | | 50 | 1000 | | 2006 CD Cost: | 0 | |$ 25 |$ 400 |$ | 2006 DVD Number: | 0 | | 600 | 1500 | 1200 | 2006 DVD Cost: | 0 | |$ 200 |$ 1000 |$ 650 | 2006 Data Bricks Number: | 0 | | | 0 | 1 | 2006 Data Bricks Cost: | 0 | | | |$ 300 | 2006 Hardware Cost: | 0 | | |$ 200 |$ 1000 | 2006 Software Cost: | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | 2007 CD Number: | 0 | | 50 | 1400 | | 2007 CD Cost: | 0 | |$ 25 |$ 700 |$ | 2007 DVD Number: | 0 | | 500 | 2300 | 400 | 2007 DVD Cost: | 0 | |$ 200 |$ 1750 |$ 200 | 2007 Data Bricks Number: | 0 | | | 0 | 1 | 2007 Data Bricks Cost: | 0 | | | |$ 300 | 2007 Hardware Cost: | 0 | | |$ 200 | | 2007 Software Cost: | 0 | | | |$ 300 | | | | | | | (7b) In the next 4 years, what are the expected equipment / media expenditures for your node: [BS] [DT] [RS] [BH] [CI] -------------------------------------------------------------------- 2008 CD Number: | 0 | | 0 | 1000 | | 2008 CD Cost: | 0 | |$ 0 |$ 500 |$ | 2008 DVD Number: | 0 | | 300 | 4500 | 400 | 2008 DVD Cost: | 0 | |$ 150 |$ 3400 |$ 200 | 2008 Data Bricks Number: | 0 | | | 0 | 1 | 2008 Data Bricks Cost: | 0 | | | |$ 300 | 2008 Hardware Cost: | 0 | | |$ 2500 |$ 2500 | 2008 Software Cost: | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | 2009 CD Number: | 0 | | 0 | 800 | | 2009 CD Cost: | 0 | |$ 0 |$ 400 |$ | 2009 DVD Number: | 0 | | 300 | 5600 | 400 | 2009 DVD Cost: | 0 | |$ 150 |$ 4200 |$ 200 | 2009 Data Bricks Number: | 0 | | | 0 | | 2009 Data Bricks Cost: | 0 | | | | | 2009 Hardware Cost: | 0 | | |$ 2500 | | 2009 Software Cost: | 0 | | | |$ 300 | (8) Involvement Interest (8a) How many hours a year does your node expect to spend in researching / keeping abreast of current hard-media technology: [NC] - 30 hours [LM] - Unknown at this time [MS] - 1 hour [BS] - 0 hours [TS] - 18.314159 hours [AR] - [DT] - 10 hours [RJ] - [RS] - 1 hour [BH] - 20 hours [CI] - 40 hours (8b) How much interest, 0=None thru 10=Keen, does your node have in seeing PDS keep abreast of current hard-media technology: [NC] - 8 [LM] - 7 [MS] - 8 [BS] - 6 [TS] - 9 [AR] - 0 [DT] - 10 [RJ] - 0 [RS] - 9 [BH] - 8 [CI] - 10 (8c) How much interest, 0=None thru 10=Keen, does your node have in keeping abreast of current hard-media technology: [NC] - 3 [LM] - 5 [MS] - 2 [BS] - 1 [TS] - 8 [AR] - 0 [DT] - 10 [RJ] - 0 [RS] - 6 [BH] - 9 [CI] - 5 (8d) How much interest, 0=None thru 10=Keen, does your node have in expending it's own resources in keeping abreast of hard-media technology: [NC] - 0 [LM] - 4 [MS] - 2 [BS] - 0 [TS] - 3 [AR] - 0 [DT] - 1 [RJ] - 0 [RS] - 1 [BH] - 6 [CI] - 5 (8e) Other issues/comments: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - Just tell us what manufactures to use if there is a difference. [BS] - n/a [TS] - THIS SHOULD BE AN EN TASK [AR] - [DT] - We would like to just be told what works without having to use resources fiddling with hardware and software. [RJ] - [RS] - RS is below critical mass in being able to make any headway in this area. [BH] - [CI] - What is meant by these ratings is we are very interested in PDS and Nodes keeping abreast but see it beneficial to coordinate a central effort through EN. (as reflected here ... good job) (9) Future (long term) Plans: (9a) Briefly describe any future plans: [NC] - We might consider the implementation of a DVD jukebox [LM] - [MS] - We support the new checksum standards and will implement a regular procedure for verifying checksums once the standards are established. [BS] - none [TS] - IMPLEMENTING ARCHIVE STORAGE SYSTEM WHICH AUTOMATICALLY CHECKS AND MAINTAINS DATA FILE INTEGRITY. DUAL-INSTALLATION WILL PROVIDE OFF-SITE BACKUP. [AR] - [DT] - We don't have a good system in place and we are waiting on the results of the working group to guide us. [RJ] - [RS] - [BH] - 1) Online system for serving data over the internet is regularly copied to rotating tape sets for backup purposes. 2) Multiple copies including NSSDC and hard media storage at another off-site location. 3) Develop a method of regularly checking hard media copies, most likely by selecting a different set of media to verify on a periodic basis. [CI] - Imaging recognizes the need to implement migration/refresh plans for IN data holdings. (10) General Issues / Comments: (10a) Please supply any general issues/comments: [NC] - [LM] - [MS] - Total costs under section 6 (procurement) are less than a few hundred dollars per year, at a level where itemizing them is not worth the effort. [BS] - We would like to see the process for electronic delivery to the NSSDC finalized ASAP. NAIF would like to find a non-California partner who will provide "warm" backup for NAIF's data sets. [TS] - [AR] - NOTE: I cannot complete sections 6-8 at all, as I don't have access to budget or planning information. Answers to Section 4 are suspect, since I don't have access to management plans and policies, and answers to section 5 are rank guesses made without knowledge of out-year planning for incoming data. [DT] - If you have more questions, feel free to call. [RJ] - [RS] - Several questions prompted responses which were not among the options listed; so what you get back will reflect (partly) what you expected. [BH] - Drives: Pioneers, even more recent models, have not been particularly reliable. Media: We have noticed that older CD-R have been unreliable. With DVDs, we have experienced a greater number of failures. We've decided to purchase only brands that have demonstrated reliability in thorough examination. Performing full bit-verification when producing new copies has become a common practice at PPI. [CI] - 1. It is difficult to predict future media use since (as you know), we (PDS) are working out details regarding e-delivery, NSSDC deep archive, predicting next-generation media, etc.. Next generation DVD format and timing will also influence future use. 2. We are trying to satisfy both distribution (near-term) and archive (long-term) requirements within the PDS. CDs & DVDs used to satisfy both needs. Now with increasing data returns, long term archive becomes more of an issue with the absence of 'hard media' at needed capacities. 3. Based on comments above regarding discerning ‘problems’ with media, hw, recording, etc, we see it important that PDS continue to coordinate with other groups (NIST, NARA, etc) in solving current problems and in anticipation of future medias. 4. Regarding CD/DVD data access problems. I would guess the culprits are (in order of likely problem source) media, recorder, and write speeds. Media and recorder are vendor issues. Regarding write speed, I suspect we get better results when recording at lower speeds, even when using high speed rated media. 5. Some info/numbers above reflect both PDS and other project work related to or anticipated for PDS work. Our assumption is this information is useful even if not currently directly related to PDS specific work.