1. DMC Technology Server Re-fresh

2. Contents Evaluate vendor Blade technology Develop a Blade architecture that meets DMC/PBB requirements Develop a stand-alone server re-fresh architecture CBA associated with migrating to a Blade architecture and it’s impact on relocating to a new data center. Observations Appendix

3. Evaluate Vendor Blade Technology

4. Evaluate vendor Blade technology Blade Architecture Benefits General Benefits (details slide 20 & 22) –Fewer Network ports –Less floor space –Less Electricity –Ease of manageability Specific DMC Benefits (details slide 22) –Increased compute power (CPU & RAM) –Increased network scaling –More virtualization capabilities

5. Evaluate vendor Blade technology Vendors Technology Evaluated IBM HP Cisco

6. Evaluate vendor Blade technology Vendor Technology Assessment Conclusion: Cisco V-Block is Not a good fit for DMC/PBB There are some fundamental distinctions that need to be taken into consideration when looking at how Vblock would support/fit DMC/PBB type services. –DMC production servers are not good virtual candidates which the V-Block infrastructure is primarily designed for. –DMC uses a file based NAS storage architecture (we have around 1.3 Petabytes of NAS). Vblock uses a block based SAN storage technology. –Vblock uses 4 NAS data movers (higher end options may support 8 data movers). DMC currently uses over 100 NAS data movers. –DMC uses a hierarchical/pooled tiered storage environment. Vblock’s tiered management capable offering uses the high end Symmetrix FAST platform. –DMC is an open architecture that can support integration of different storage and server environments. Vblock is a closed technology architecture.

7. Evaluate vendor Blade technology Technology Assessment Conclusion: IBM is rated above HP, but not by a significant amount. Either IBM or HP would meet DMC/PBB needs. (If IBM pricing ends up being equal to or cheaper than HP, we would go with IBM.)

8. Develop a Blade architecture which meets DMC/PBB requirements Develop a stand-alone server re- fresh architecture Note : There are separate attachments covering the above two deliverables.

9. CBA

10. CBA Considerations Some servers will continue to be stand-alone and will require upgrading regardless if DMC moves to a Blade server architecture. The new location has limited floor space within the initial build out allocation for DMC. There are many variables that make it difficult to capture all costs associated with Blades and servers going into the new data center.

11. CBA Approach The DMC server infrastructure was grouped as follows: Group A: Systems that are past due for re-fresh Group B: Systems that need to start being re-freshed this year Group C: Systems that have one to two more years before needing a re-fresh Key data analyzed (list is not prioritized): Racks neededStand-alone servers Blade serversRAM Core compute powerNetwork Ports Electrical powerFloor space Associated pricing Working with IBM and HP, a Blade architecture was developed and priced in line with DMC/PBB requirements. The prices were not negotiated. HP provided pricing using the SPE standard discount and IBM provided what they called “budget planning” pricing.

12. CBA Blade Architecture & Stand-Alone Server Upgrade IBMBlades *Remaining Stand-Alone Server (SAS) Upgrades (non-blade able) Totals Group A $480,803 (45 blades = 73physical servers) $98,136 (11 physical servers upgrades) $578,942 Group B $331,143 (46 blades=46 physical servers) $69,911 (8 physical servers upgrades) $401,054 Group C $453,970 (59 blades=59physical servers) (leaving 10 newer physical servers that are non-blade able and don’t need upgrades) $453,970 Group A+B $811,946 (91 blades=119physical) $168,047 (19 SAS upgrades) $977,143 Group A+B+C $1,265,916 (150 blades = 178 Physical) $168,047 (19 SAS upgrades) $1,431,113 The IBM & HP prices are not negotiated prices. HP used Standard SPE discount pricing IBM provided “budget planning” pricing. Group A: Systems that are past due for re-fresh Group B: Systems that need to start being re-freshed this year Group C: Systems that have one to two more years before needing a re-fresh * See slide 23 for details

13. CBA Blade Architecture & Stand-Alone Server Upgrade HPBlades *Remaining Stand-Alone Server (SAS) Upgrades ( non-blade able) Totals Group A $454,907 (45 blades = 73physical servers) $98,136 (11 physical servers upgrades) $553,043 Group B $294,111 (46 blades=46 physical servers) $69,911 (8 physical servers upgrades) $364,022 Group C $428,928 (59blades=59physical servers) (leaving 10 newer physical servers that are non-blade able and don’t need upgrades) $428,928 Group A+B $749,018 (91 blades=119physical) $168,047 (19 SAS upgrades) $917,065 Group A+B+C $1,177,946 (150 blades = 178 Physical) $168,047 (19 SAS upgrades) $1,345,993 The IBM & HP prices are not negotiated prices. HP used Standard SPE discount pricing IBM provided “budget planning” pricing. Group A: Systems that are past due for re-fresh Group B: Systems that need to start being re-freshed this year Group C: Systems that have one to two more years before needing a re-fresh * See slide 23 for details

14. Only Group A Upgraded Only Group A+ B upgraded Group C Server Needing Upgrades 84138N/A Servers Moving Without Upgrades 12369 Servers Moving Can not be upgraded 33 DMC Servers Totals *240 *240= 138+69+33 Grand Totals $682,084$1,126,086 Group A: Systems that are past due for re-fresh Group B: Systems that need to start being re-freshed this year Group C: Systems that have one to two more years before needing a re-fresh CBA Server Upgrade - No Blades (this is a separate plan from the blade architecture. There may be slightly different sever numbers versus blade number, because of differences associated with virtualization …) *There are 240 DMC servers that make up the active server pool. 33 of these systems can not be upgraded. See slide 23 for details.

15. CBA Cost Summary *New Facility Costs Upgrade Costs 3 yr Maintenance Totals Blades + SAS Group A $509,064$ 553,043$0$1,062,107 Blades + SAS Group A+B $464,040$ 917,065$0$1,381,105 Blades + SAS Group A+B+C $400,324$ 1,345,993$0$1,746,317 SAS only Group A $575,028$ 682,086$58,000$1,315,114 SAS only Group A+B $575,028$1,126,086$37,450$1,738,564 **Do Nothing $575,028$0$ 289,800$ 864,828 SAS=Stand-Alone Server *see Appendix: slide 20 ** Not upgrading will result in systems that will not be supportable, along with enhrent performance degradation. Capacity planning efforts show that DMG throughput requirements will continue to double year over year for the foreseeable future.

16. Observations

17. Based on the current layout and space allocations for DMC, If we do not move to Blades we will immediately use up all racks space planned for servers. (slides 19,20,22) We should move forward with Blade upgrade of “Group A + B” prior to moving data centers. With Blade migration, Compute power goes up significantly, while network port needs go down significantly, and space needs go down. ( See Appendix: Data Elements slide 22.)

18. Apendix

19. New Data Center Layout There are 16 racks for servers This is the Petasite location Storage Location

20. Facilities Costs Move without Blade upgrade QTYBlade Group A & remaining Stand-alone servers QTYBlade Group A+B & remaining Stand-alone Servers QTYBlade Group A+B+C & Remaining Stand-alone Servers QTY Fixed Costs *Ports (1Gb+10Gb+FC) $340,6601060$318,640818$315,560700$283,140405 Rack Build$80,00016$65,00013$50,00010$40,0008 Sub-Totals $420,660$383,640$365,560$323,140 Recurring Costs (Yr) Rack Floor Space $117,12016$95,16013$73,20010$58,5608 Electricity/Rack$37,24816$30,26413$23,28010$18,6248 Sub-Totals 1yr $154,368$125,424$96,480$77,184 Total $575,028$509,064$462,040$400,324 *Note that fixed port costs going forward can be significantly higher if additional switching and power and space are needed when scaling…

21. Upgrade Cost Details Using HP Blades & remaining stand-alone servers (SAS) costs: Server Upgrade - No Blades UpgradesFixed*1 yr Recurring Totals Group A$682,084$420,660$154,368$1,257,112 Group A+B$1,126,086$420,660$154,368$1,701,114 HP costsUpgradesFixed*1 yr Recurring Totals Group A+SAS$553,043$383,640$125,424$1,062,107 Group A+B+SAS$917,065$365,560$96,480$1,379,105 Group A+B+C+SAS$1,345,993$323,140$77,184$1,746,317 SAS= Stand-alone Servers Server Maintenance Offsets1 yr Recurring No Upgrades$84,000 (rising annually) Group A upgraded$58,800 Group A+B upgraded$37,450 * See slide 20

22. CBA Data Elements Group A Blades & remaining Stand- alone Servers Group A+B Blades & remaining Stand- alone Servers Blade Group A+B+C & remaining Stand- alone Servers Server Count Without Upgrades Blades45 (73 physical) 91 (119 physical) 150 (178 physical) 0 Stand- alone servers 1348829207 Not upgradable 33 Total Cores2087231925631050 RAM (GB)3960518063721854 Racks1310816 1 Gbp ports702568257958 10 Gbp ports 48641046 FC ports68 4496 Using IBM’s architecture as a baseline No upgrades=more network ports used, more racks space needed, more electricity used, and less compute power. Note Compute power= cores+ram normalized divided by 10 Electricity detailed on slide 20 Network ports are normalized dividing by 10

23. Non-Blade Able Servers 33 Non-upgrade Able 1 x PetaSite Console - tied to PetaSite 1 x RTL - Luxembourg transfer server 3 x Digital Backbone - Tatsu Oiye 5 x CW - colorworks hosted devices 7 x Apple servers 16 x Sun Server 29 Non-Blade Able, upgraded as Stand-Alone Servers 1 x FaspEX - requires lots of local disk space 3 x SQL DB - cannot get as much horsepower as we can with standalone 5 x Oracle DB - cannot get as much horsepower as we can with standalone 20 x Transcode Servers - require lots of local disk space