Attendance:
Mike (m
Alan (alanw)
(simplyhd)
Sherry
Sanjay

Meeting started 7:26 PM
Talking about toner
Mike: We have 2 left. It costs about $700. SAS disks are more expensive than SATA disks.
Alan: If we buy SAS, will we have enough money for toner.
Mike: We could earmark the money for SAS.
Sanjay: We could buy a mix.
Mike: We only have 8 slots left unless we want to buy an expansion. SAS disks cost around $2700 for 1.2 TB (4X300GB). Other qualities include: 15.5K RPM and more reliable. SATA costs $1200 for 4 TB (4X1TB). Other qualities include 7200 RPM and less reliable.
Alan: What will these store?
Mike: Eventually everything.
Sanjay: 4.8 TB has been allocated to home directories. In theory, 4 TB is a minimum.
Alan: How many slots total do we have?
Sanjay: We have 16 slots.
Mike: We can get another expansion array. The argument is SAS disks are way more expensive but more reliable. SATA disks are cheaper and come in higher capacities but they're less reliable.
Alan: Sounds like a comparison between solid-state and normal drive.
Sanjay: We are going to be using less space. We are basically using only 1/4 of what we have allocated.
Mike: These numbers are the raw capacity.
Alan: If we do have a mix of SAS and SATA, how do we decide which goes to which?
Mike: Things that change often and opthdvd and opt-ocf will be on the SAS drives and web directories will end up on SATA drives.
Alan: Are we planning on buying 8 more drives?
Mike: Eventually we want 8. How much we buy depends on how much money we want to put in.
Sanjay: Getting 4 disks is a good number and we can get 4 more later.
Mike: The prices might be better than this to see if we can get an academic discount. We have 2.4 TB raw on our SAS right now.
Alan: We could cut back and not many people would complain, so we don't need that many SAS disks. We'll get 1 or 2 SAS. Why can't we use the old ones?
Mike: It's because our disk array is bad and the disks in that array does not work with the new disk array we bought.

Time to get pizza.

Mike: Web directories are locally mounted on famine so we're debating whether we want to use the new array.
Sanjay: I think we should go for the SATA array now. Four of them. We can always get 4 more SAS if necessary.
Mike: If we put home directories on 4 disks, it's going to be difficult to migrate those over to 8 if we decide to expand later. So if we're going to go for more capacity, we want to do it from the outset.
Sanjay: Should we do 4 to 1 parity?
Mike: We could go for raid 5 or raid 6 (more capacity and more redundancy, respectively).
Sanjay: We would have to get 6 disks for raid 6. So if we bought 8 SATA drives we would get 6 TB. 
Mike: The higher the raid level the better. We have always run on raid 5 in the past. Let's just get 8 SATA.
Sanjay: Are we going to grow home directories more than that (as in are we going to get more users)? So we won't use more than 5 TB. How much do we need to protect ourselves for home directories?
simplyhd: Why don't we get 5 or 6 SATAs right now and get others later.
Sanjay: I don't want to allocate less space for home directories than we have now.
Alan: How many are we using now.
Sanjay: 886 GB was actually used.
Alan: Let's get 6 SATAs.
Sanjay: We'll get a quote.
Alan: And we'll tell Jordan about it.

Mike: Do we want to get Matlab licenses for the OCF? They are a minimum of 10 seats, but they're roaming
Alan: That is not worth it.
Sanjay: Agreed.
simplyhd: Yea.

Sanjay: Today someone downloaded. We had to go through someone's smbprofile  so is that a violation of privacy?
Mike: No, we said that we reserve the right to go through their info if something happened and was a threat. If we have reasonable grounds to suppose there is a security threat, we have reason to look through their files.
Sanjay: So we can send them an email. So if any of you are ever going to do that, preserve your logs. Send a tree of what is there. Don't just go into someone's Firefox cache.
simplyhd: We should save a record of it. So if someone wants to know about it you can show them.
Alan: Why do we have to look through it?
Mike: We have to look at what the virus was and if it only messed with her profile or if it will go for the rest of the system. If you're ever in doubt, just give them an empty profile.
Sanjay: Do we want to run ___ on smbprofiles? I can imagine some people having issues with that. 
Mike: Two arguments against: this isn't the users' computer and it's not us reading all their word documents (we are passing their stuff through a virus scanner).
Sanjay: We should document that or we need to have an opt-out service.
Mike: No. If we implement virus scanning, everyone has to go under virus scanning because it only takes one person to infect the whole system. We don't keep any contents of the files. It's just the software that goes through it.
Alan: If we go to the other micro computer facilities, I believe it scans your files (Evans, Dwinelle, Tolman). So we should have that power as well.
Mike: If we wanted to implement that, we would have to create a formalized policy.
Alan: So are we going to scan through people's profiles?
Sanjay: I want to test the virus itself to make sure that it didn't compromise the machine. I think it's in a directory that cannot be changedÉ? The machine that got compromised, I think it's in the cache file of all users.
Mike: So when you're done with the forensics, wipe it just to be sure. We'll have to unregister Adobe Creative Suite and then re-install it.

Meeting ended at 8:21 PM

Action items:
- get quote for 6 SATAs and tell Jordan
- fix the machine that got infected