On 2/08/2012 1:09 p.m., Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
Ultimately you can place it where ever you want.
Agreed. All the natural disaster FUD really does seem like stuff that has to be 'managed' where ever you go.
It doesn't matter much as long as:
Christchurch. - Our ground is now better understood than any other place in the region.
a) The data centre is a very good quality one with lots of power and people who are clueful and sane commercially (ie. don't act like d**ks because your _THE_ site to go).
Power is something we can do here. My last 18 months we've had two short outages and given the quakes we've had, that's just amazing. People are people where ever you go but I totally agree with you that it's really important to keep the team grounded and focused.
b) It has good onsite services so that my NOC guys can call up and get stuff done 24x7
Moving around Christchurch is just quicker and easier than other locations. So even if staff aren't on site (which I do get you want them to be), it just doesn't take as long to get them to the site. Because the city is smaller, the chances of the key staff living further away is less.
c) It has *freaking awesome* connectivity to *EVERY* provider in NZ that matters, including TNZ, TC, Vodafone etc so that one deployment can pickup almost all of NZ and that access to the landing stations or connectivity out of NZ is cheap and easy.
Having 'Enabled Networks' with fibre over the whole city means that getting to the other providers should be simpler.
d) Less importantly it's easy to get to from Auckland airport, it's got a good hotel nearby and some nice food.
Christchurch has a fantastic international airport which is very close to a number of industrial parks which would make sense for such a DC. It's got good hotels with in 10 minutes range of said industrial parks.
As long as a,b and c are met then people will start appearing. Build it and they will come.
I do understand that 1/3rd of the population is in Auckland, but at present much of the data is only travelling south. I wonder if it would be more cost effective to use the 'back load' capacity heading back up the country? Where are the major content produces such as TVNZ and Media Works hosting their servers currently, Auckland? Further, their are currently a growing number of Christchurch based investors who are about to be paid out by insurance companies for buildings that have (or are about to be) pulled down (blown up). Landing a cable in Westport would make sense to me because we could then serve Christchurch based content out to Australia --> the world, we can use the back haul capacity back up past 2/3rds of the country to Auckland, we get redundancy, what have I missed? So: A - We understand the ground. B - We have an IX and great fibre connectivity. C - We have 'back load' capacity. D - We have people with investment money to spend. MMC > Before you bash me for the north v's south thing, I totally agree with you, we need to stop that rubbish and just focus on getting the job done. In presenting these arguments I'm thinking about the technical issues and key points you raised. It seems to me that there should be resource at this end of the string that could be used to achieve the outcomes you're driving at. D -- Don Gould 31 Acheson Ave Mairehau Christchurch, New Zealand Ph: + 64 3 348 7235 Mobile: + 64 21 114 0699