AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:<20080204103130.4102dba9@ripper.onstor.net>
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@onstor.com
RQ:
SSV:onstor-exch02.onstor.net
NSV:
SSH:
R:<joshua.goldenhar@onstor.com>
MAID:1
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/andys@onstor.net@onstor-exch02.onstor.net/INBOX	0	BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0812B255@onstor-exch02.onstor.net
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 10:31:40 -0800
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
To: "Joshua Goldenhar" <joshua.goldenhar@onstor.com>
Subject: Re: Beta Readiness Criteria Document
Message-ID: <20080204103140.74c30ed1@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0812B255@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
References: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0812AF9A@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E080CB04C@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0812B255@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
Organization: Onstor
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Josh,

Sooo, which are the comments and which are the responses?

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 10:02:21 -0800 "Joshua Goldenhar"
<joshua.goldenhar@onstor.com> wrote:

> Responses in-line below..
> 
>  
> 
> -Josh 
> 
> Josh Goldenhar 
> Phone: 408 963 2408, Cell: 408 547 7693 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: Paul Hammer 
> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 12:16 PM
> To: Joshua Goldenhar; dl-Cougar
> Subject: RE: Beta Readiness Criteria Document
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks Josh, very helpful and a good start.
> 
>  
> 
> Sandrine is correct, we do not currently have plans/requirements to
> increase the number of vsvr's or volumes. Also believe that the >2tb
> lun will only be available by FCS, won't make beta. 
> 
> Hmm - OK, did that drop out while I was away? Did it move to keg or is
> it off the table all together. I didn't think the lun label stuff
> would make Beta, that's why I put it in "desired" instead of
> required. I removed the >32 vservers.
> 
>  
> 
> Assume where the docs says 2 node cluster it means 2 mother boards
> and 1 physical chassis. Believe that QA is already testing with a 2
> physical chassis and 4 mother board cfg, Vikas can you confirm?
> 
> Yes - I believe we will only be sending out single chassis, dual node
> systems.
> 
>  
> 
> So for beta it looks like we only require 3 switches and 2 storage
> arrays supported (only surprise to me was the absence of Nexsan). This
> is good. What is a V100 Pantera? Is this Xyratex?
> 
> Yes, the V100 is the Xyratex 5404 storage. No Nexsan in the beta
> customers and we want to start de-emphasizing our support for Nexsan
> since we will push the V100 as a denser alternative.
> 
>  
> 
> Can you let us know what DMA we need qualified (if any) , and with
> what tape device?
> 
> None - I put NDMP and backup apps in the "desired" section. If we get
> any, it's a bonus. NetBackup would probably top the list. LT03 and 04
> tape drives. Doc has been updated.
> 
>  
> 
> Client support looks good, not sure we need NT (can't recall if we
> even support today outside of an AD host), no Mac support?
> 
> Mac support is thorny because of the leopard issue. Last I heard we
> were considering this an apple problem, not ours to fix, that Apple
> would be coming out with a patch. Has that changed?
> 
>  
> 
> Thought we discussed DMIP at the team meeting last week and agreed
> that we did not have to have this support, although Cougar to Bobcat
> and vice a versa is a feasible combination. I am okay with adding it
> if it will help with the beta should not be hard to test, don't think
> there is any incompatibility between the two. Ditto for vol import.
> 
> I'm OK moving DMIP (cougar-Cougar) to "desired" as Sandrine was right
> that it is unlikely to be tested. I would like to keep vol import in
> required but is this important to test if the LUN label work is NOT
> there?
> 
>  
> 
> Given our customer base I would think that we may need to require
> Copper SFP's support for beta.
> 
> Yep.
> 
>  
> 
> Josh, are we providing and Pantera's for beta (Cougar with Storage pre
> configured), or are we only providing Cougar?
> 
> I believe we are only supplying Cougar HW, no storage.
> 
>  
> 
> Are we going to require a beta refresh during the beta (forces testing
> of upgrade in the field, think that would be a good test)?
> 
> I think it's inevitable - I thought I had put system upgrade in must
> have but I see it's missing, adding it to the doc.
> 
>  
> 
> Post Beta Completion questions (not sure that they belong in the
> readiness doc but thought I would ask):
> 
> Do we have to retain user data created during the beta?
> 
> Nope.
> 
> Do we have to retain configuration data created during the beta?
> 
> Nope
> 
> Do we have to have a way to migrate a cougar from Beta code to
> production code?
> 
> Hmm - The last discussion I was involved in said we were going to
> bring the Beta units back home, that the units that went out for beta
> would not be converted to sales - at least not the actual physical
> units themselves. I suppose much of the answer to this question lies
> with "Will the beta units be complete HW final versions, at final
> versions of PROM code?" and if system upgrade works properly. Will
> have to investigate.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>  
> 
> -Paul
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: Joshua Goldenhar
> Sent: Sun 2/3/2008 9:59 AM
> To: dl-Cougar
> Subject: Beta Readiness Criteria Document
> 
> First released draft is attached. It will be kept and maintained in:
> 
> \\mightydog\Program Management\Cougar\Marketing
> 
> -Josh 
> 
> Josh Goldenhar 
> Sr. Dir. Technical Strategy 
> ONStor, Inc. - http://www.onstor.com/ 
> joshua.goldenhar@onstor.com 
> Phone: 408 963 2408, Cell: 408 547 7693 
> 
>  
> 
