General:

• This was an institutional interviewee
• Was part of the Box decision making process and remains a strong advocate
• Manages institutional storage primarily for administrative and academic purposes (note: Cornell has been restructuring its computer-related organizations)
• Characterized himself as having limited support for research-related computing

Backup vs. Sync

• Focused on enterprise backup methods mostly using Tivoli
• Three levels: (1) institutional, (2) departmental and (3) workstation/desktop

Sync (Box):

• Cornell one of eight pilot schools
• Cornell is paying for Box as a NET+ service but did not know relative rates (i.e. is it discounted)
• Augments a Cornell internal provided service
• Seems primarily a collaboration service not backup (see more on backup elsewhere in the interview note)
• Cornell permits connections between private accounts (from anyone) to university-provided accounts
• Seems more used via browser than by platform sync service (according to traffic monitors) but both are used
• Platform sync requires download of software directly from Box and installation by the user (though it may become part of managed desktops)
• Participated in Box contract negotiations which lead to discussions of "trust"

Backup:

• Most institutional servers and many departmental servers are backed up using Tivoli
• Offsite backups are kept (at the Weill Medical Center in NYC) and transferred by network
• Cornell is moving also have a remote backup site outside NY since NYC is still close enough to cause concern
• Participation of researchers in the Tivoli backup voluntary

Managed Desktops:

• Cornell has about 1/3 of all desktops under management
• This is similar to a corporate managed desktop scheme where the licensed software is installed and managed by a central organization
• Almost all managed desktops are used by administrative or service staff
• Managed desktops are backed up using Tivoli backup tooling

Researchers:

• Like to own the equipment because it cannot easily be taken away
• Administration of researcher-owned equipment is spotty especially for backup
• Institutions (and departments) have a hard time requiring solutions be applied to smaller research infrastructures
• Data management plans have no teeth yet to create a demand from researchers
• No one has any idea where the money will come from to finance archival data in higher ed

Major Learning Points:

• Resonated with notion of combining backup, sync, collaboration and provisioning appropriate applications
• Wants open "standards"
• "Trust" is a big factor
• Control is a factor but it is not part of the customers thought process yet (outside trust)

Additional Potential Contacts:

• Dave Vernon / TED
• Wendy Kaslowski - Lead of RDMSG (Research Data Management Study Group) Cornell Library
• Dave Lifga (CSNF) - Likely closer to researcher provisioning
• Pete Basanka (CSHF) - Likely closer to researcher provisioning
• Ted Dodds - Likely made the final decision