Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold

2013-05-08 09:27:32
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
From: Paul Zarnowski <psz1 AT CORNELL DOT EDU>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 09:25:18 -0400

Your note reminded me that I left out a couple of steps in my description of 
what we do.  We also change the nodename on the node as it is exported to the 
other server.  We don't suspend expiration while the export is running.  
Instead, we change it's domain on the original server while the export is 
running.  That domain has all the same management classes as the original 
domain, but with infinite copies and retention.  Once the export is complete, 
we move the original node back to its original domain.  Fixing up the schedule 
association.  This allows expiration to continue running for all other nodes on 
the server.

Harold, changing the domain of the node would have the immediate effect that 
you are looking for.


At 05:39 PM 5/7/2013, Richard Rhodes wrote:
>Our approach has been to export/import the node to another TSM instance
>under a different node name with a suffix or prefix that indicated the
>hold.  THe mgt class is set to no-expire.    We stop expiration until this
>copy is made.  This approach has lets the node be processed as usual, and
>the copy can sit for as long as needed.
>From:   "Vandeventer, Harold [BS]" <Harold.Vandeventer AT KS DOT GOV>
>Date:   05/07/2013 03:36 PM
>Subject:        Re: TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
>Sent by:        "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
>Great ideas Paul.... I'm preparing to build the alternate server without
>expiration approach as soon as I can scare up some resources.
>I'll look at the alternate Domain approach also.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
>Paul Zarnowski
>Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 12:54 PM
>Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM RFE regarding Litigation Hold
>We deal with a variety of types of litigation hold here, as well.  What
>you can do now, easily, is to setup a parallel policy domain (i.e.,
>LITHOLD) that has all the same management classes, but different retention
>policy (i.e., retain forever).  Then, to avoid expiration you just have to
>do this:
>This works if you have all the same management classes defined in LITHOLD
>that you had defined in the original domain.  You can move the node back
>and forth between domains as needed.  If LITHOLD is missing a management
>class, then retention would be controlled by the "grace period"
>definitions of the domain - something you'll probably want to avoid.
>No changes needed on the client side since you're not changing management
>class names, just their attributes.
>If you have associated a schedule with the node, then you'll need to have
>copies of the schedules in LITHOLD and re-associate the node with the
>schedule in the LITHOLD domain (which can be defined the same).
>We also deal with other types of litigation holds that require is to take
>a snapshot of the data.  For this, we simply export (a copy of) the node
>to another TSM server instance where expiration does not run or has no
>At 05:05 PM 5/3/2013, Vandeventer, Harold [BS] wrote:
>>To all...
>>I created an RFE to affect File Spaces and Expiration.  The feature would
>cause expiration processing to be skipped for a file space that has been
>>It's RFE ID 33395 if you care to review and vote.
>>Briefly, the idea is to immediately respond to a situation in which we
>cannot allow Expiration Processing to delete information that would
>otherwise be deleted.  This would be in response to a "Litigation Hold"
>demand from a legal issue at hand.  I've had three LitHold events in the
>past 24 months; they're not much fun and I'm not in the court room, just
>the TSM Server Admin.
>>Allowing a "LitigationHold=Yes" would avoid expiration on the File Space.
>>When the court case is lifted, simply revert to ""LitigationHold=No". The
>next Expiration process would then begin the delete process as is normal.
>>The feature would avoid the complexity of assigning a "no expire"
>management class to the node and trying to later revert to a more typical
>>Please take a look at the RFE, and cast a vote if you feel it's a
>valuable feature.
>>Harold Vandeventer
>>Systems Programmer
>>State of Kansas - Office of Information Technology Services STE 751-S
>>910 SW Jackson
>>(785) 296-0631
>>[Confidentiality notice:]
>>This e-mail message, including attachments, if any, is intended for the
>>person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential
>>or privileged information.  Any unauthorized review, use, or disclosure
>>is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
>>the sender and destroy the original message, including all copies,
>>Thank you.
>Paul Zarnowski                            Ph: 607-255-4757
>Manager of Storage Services               Fx: 607-255-8521
>IT at Cornell / Infrastructure            Em: psz1 AT cornell DOT edu
>719 Rhodes Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-3801
>The information contained in this message is intended only for the
>personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If
>the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an
>agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you
>are hereby notified that you have received this document in error
>and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
>this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
>communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete
>the original message.

Paul Zarnowski                            Ph: 607-255-4757
Manager of Storage Services               Fx: 607-255-8521
IT at Cornell / Infrastructure            Em: psz1 AT cornell DOT edu
719 Rhodes Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-3801

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>