Difference between revisions of "Service for AAI: EGI Catchall Availability and continuity Plan"
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
In the OLA it was agreed the following performances targets, on a monthly basis: | In the OLA it was agreed the following performances targets, on a monthly basis: | ||
*Availability: | *Availability: 95% | ||
*Reliability 99% | *Reliability 99% | ||
Over the past years, | Over the past years, '''EGI Catchall''' hadn't particular Av/Co issues highlighted by the performances that need to be further investigated. | ||
= Risks assessment and management = | = Risks assessment and management = |
Revision as of 16:20, 2 November 2018
Main | EGI.eu operations services | Support | Documentation | Tools | Activities | Performance | Technology | Catch-all Services | Resource Allocation | Security |
Documentation menu: | Home • | Manuals • | Procedures • | Training • | Other • | Contact ► | For: | VO managers • | Administrators |
Back to main page: Services Availability Continuity Plans
Introduction
This page reports on the Availability and Continuity Plan for the EGI Catchall and it is the result of the risks assessment conducted for this service: a series of risks and treats has been identified and analysed, along with the correspondent countermeasures currently in place. Whenever a countermeasure is not considered satisfactory for either avoiding or reducing the likelihood of the occurrence of a risk, or its impact, it is agreed with the service provider a new treatment for improving the availability and continuity of the service. The process is concluded with an availability and continuity test.
Last | Next | |
---|---|---|
Risks assessment | 2018-10-24 | - |
Av/Co plan | in progress | - |
Performances
The performances reports in terms of Availability and Reliability are produced by ARGO on an almost real time basis and they are also periodically collected into the Documentation Database.
In the OLA it was agreed the following performances targets, on a monthly basis:
- Availability: 95%
- Reliability 99%
Over the past years, EGI Catchall hadn't particular Av/Co issues highlighted by the performances that need to be further investigated.
Risks assessment and management
For more details, please look at the google spreadsheet. We will report here a summary of the assessment.
Risks analysis (to update)
Risk id | Risk description | Affected components | Established measures | Risk level | Treatment | Expected duration of downtime / time for recovery |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Service unavailable / loss of data due to hardware failure | VOMS database, MyProxy proxy files | The VOMS database and the MyProxy proxy directory are regularly backuped. Additionally, they are running on a redundant VM environment, on a redundant storage | Low | Service restored from backups | 1 working day |
2 | Service unavailable / loss of data due to software failure | VOMS database, MyProxy proxy files | The VOMS database and the MyProxy proxy directory are regularly backuped. Additionally, they are running on a redundant VM environment, on a redundant storage | Low | Service restored from backups | 1 working day |
3 | service unavailable / loss of data due to human error | VOMS database, MyProxy proxy files | The VOMS database and the MyProxy proxy directory are regularly backuped. Additionally, they are running on a redundant VM environment, on a redundant storage | Low | Service restored from backups | 1 working day |
4 | service unavailable for network failure (Network outage with causes external of the site) | VOMS, MyProxy | There are redundant uplinks connecting the data center to the public network. | Medium | Service restored from backups | 1 working day |
5 | Unavailability of key technical and support staff (holidays period, sickness, ...) | VOMS, MyProxy | There is always one member of the team available. | Low | - | - |
6 | Major disruption in the data centre. Fire, flood or electric failure for example | VOMS database, MyProxy proxy files | The data center is well maintained, with UPS, diesel generator and fire suppression system. | Medium | Service restored from backups | 1 or more working days |
7 | Major security incident. The system is compromised by external attackers and needs to be reinstalled and restored. | VOMS database, MyProxy proxy files | The VOMS database and the MyProxy proxy directory are regularly backuped. | Low | Service restored from backups | 1 working day |
8 | (D)DOS attack. The service is unavailable because of a coordinated DDOS. | VOMS, MyProxy | The network is monitored for DDOS attacks by GRNET NOC. | Medium | Service restored from backups | 1 working day |
Outcome
The level of all the identified risks is acceptable and the countermeasures already adopted are considered satisfactory
Availability and Continuity test
Given the use of an off-site failover, it was agreed with the provider that testing a recovery scenario is not currently realistic.
In the event that the service at RAL disappears, the DNS entry would we flipped to point at the failover in DL, whilst reinstalling locally if needed. The failover at DL is accessible here: https://goc.dl.ac.uk . The provider recently updated its DNS entry to point at its load balancers using the scripts for the failover, so they are confident these work.
One of provider major pieces of work for this year is moving the GOCDB to a different internal infrastructure. This will introduce configuration management to GOCDB for the first time. As such whatever reinstall process they were to test today would be obsolete in a matter of months.
Once the movement have been made, it will be evaluated the execution of a recovery test.
Revision History
Version | Authors | Date | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Alessandro Paolini | 2018-11-02 | first draft, discussing with the provider | |