[NCUC E-team] [NCUC Finance] Hosting the NCUC E-Platform

[Wilson Abigaba]

Thanks Brenden!

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:36 PM, Brenden Kuerbis <
bkuerbis at internetgovernance.org> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I've taken the liberty of revising the VPS request based on your comments
> and discussion on list(s).  Please take a quick peek, but I believe its
> ready to ship off to the EC for approval.  Lets get moving on this so we
> can setup the VPS, an instance of WordPress and migrate the email lists.
>
> -- B
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Wilson Abigaba <wilson at isoc.ug> wrote:
>
>> Team,
>>
>> Below is the feedback I have gotten from finance team so far. Points
>> are randomly listed.
>> - We need to create a platform that is not technically demanding  and
>> time consuming so that it can be easily maintained beyond the current
>> team.
>> - We need to add more detail about specific requirements and costs
>> - I think we need to justify why we should drop ning and adopt a VPS
>> - Proposal should be sent to (and approved by) the EC
>> - We might also need to formally consider (at least 3, as per the
>> standard procurement procedures) other vendors so that we justify why
>> Gandi was chosen.
>>
>> I am stepping out for a few hours but here is our current proposal. I
>> think we can edit it concurrently and send it to EC by end of today.
>>
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NxYgmqlhoBX9BQJOIcZ6EVsbctzn3WZHMGDty63xLxs/edit
>>
>> Reading Tapani's response below, I personally wouldn't recommend
>> anything significantly below the suggested $400 as I think it's
>> already at 'minimum requirement' considering what we want to do :)
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>> Wilson
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Tapani Tarvainen
>> <ncuc at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:01:06PM +0100, William Drake (
>> william.drake at uzh.ch) wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Feb 20, 2013, at 22:22, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> >> > One must be careful of ongoing expenditures, especially if they
>> >> > lock us in to anything that would be costly to get out of, but
>> >> > $400/year is certainly not out of reach.
>> >
>> >> > It does seem a bit high (without knowing the requirements) as the
>> >> > current Ning site is $235/year but if VPS does something that
>> >> > normal hosting doesn't, I am sure you can convince EC to approve
>> >> > it.
>> >
>> >> Wilson and Tapani, were there other vendors/options? Agree with MM a
>> >> little more detail/background wouldn't I hurt for an ongoing
>> >> expenditure, even if it's less for a decade than we spend at a time
>> >> on other stuff.
>> >
>> > We did not do a formal comparison of vendors, it was felt
>> > unnecessary due to the relatively small amount involved and
>> > the fact that we already are using Gandi for DNS registration
>> > so using it for hosting as well avoids extra work in account
>> > management. But we did discuss the features we wanted
>> > (listed in Wilson's document) and we're well enough aware of
>> > the market situation to know Gandi is cheap for what they offer.
>> >
>> > We could cut down on the $400 figure, however, by settling on a less
>> > powerful VPS. The smallest available VPS at Gandi would be about
>> > $170/year or $16/month (or $0.53/day!), and if you want to keep
>> > tighter rein on the expenditure we could start with that.
>> > It would probably to run out of power pretty soon though if we get
>> > around to doing all we've been planning to, but it would be enough to
>> > get us started and buying more oomph in small chunks only as needed
>> > is of course possible, even down to daily basis if desired.
>> > The downside there would be the extra time required to manage it
>> > and to process and approve the bills piecemeal.
>> > So I guess it boils down to how much people's time is worth, how
>> > small amounts merit a separate decision in the EC, how much time
>> > the sysadmins need to spend to monitor the machine and adjust
>> > it as needed, &c.
>> >
>> > One possibly money-saving alternative would be for the EC to authorize
>> > expenditure of up to a certain amount, like that $400, but
>> > recommending that it be used cautiously, buying more power bit by bit
>> > as the need arises. That way it would only use up e-team's and
>> > Milton's time rather than EC's and could be done faster.
>> > That's actually a good reason for having some pre-approved
>> > budget not spent at once, we might have an unexpected peak
>> > in bandwitdh or something we'd like to react to fast
>> > (maybe some outreach effort explodes our popularity and
>> > we get a billion people hitting our site at once...)
>> >
>> > But, since we're just starting to work out new processes here,
>> > I would be OK with going slowly: as I said that $170 would be
>> > enough to get us started, just don't be surprised when the
>> > e-team asks for more later.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Tapani Tarvainen
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Finance mailing list
>> > Finance at lists.ncuc.org
>> > http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/finance
>> _______________________________________________
>> E-team mailing list
>> E-team at lists.ncuc.org
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/e-team
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> E-team mailing list
> E-team at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/e-team
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/e-team/attachments/20130226/128f147b/attachment.html>