Scenario taxonomy/lang-es: Difference between revisions
RafaelOrtiz (talk | contribs) m (trans) |
RafaelOrtiz (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
Power in school - enough for AP and 2 x servers, enough for one server max, not enough for any servers <br> |
Power in school - enough for AP and 2 x servers, enough for one server max, not enough for any servers <br> |
||
Wireless access - Wireless AP, active attenna, none <br> |
Wireless access - Wireless AP, active attenna, none <br> |
||
More detailed break down of these details at: |
More detailed break down of these details at: [[Networking scenarios]] <br> |
||
Size of school - 10 - 50, 51 - 100, 100 - 200 <br> |
Size of school - 10 - 50, 51 - 100, 100 - 200 <br> |
||
Latest revision as of 23:42, 26 May 2008
Scenario Taxonomy
Introduccion
This taxonomy addresses different scenarios that may occur in implementation of XO laptops and school servers. The taxonomy in its current form is simple and by no means comprehensive. Hopefully, this will change over time.
Casos de Uso
These scenarios can be reinforced with use cases that provide a hypothetical example of use and often help in understanding needs and assessing constraints.
Some info on real deployment examples (details not confirmed):
Low and intermittent power in schools. 8 Mb/s to Data center. 150 students. From DC to Internet 256 Kb/s. Max 512 MB RAM available for school server.
Decision was to use wireless AP in school. School server for mesh, DHCP, and DNS only. Possible moodle or hosting later. Squid on server in DC.
- Peru - URL?
- Uruguay -
- Cambodia -
- Colombia - (coming soon)
Componentes del Servidor
- Backup
- Upgrade and configuration management
- Network Gateway
- Caching Proxy
- Authentication
- Content management
- Repository
Limitaciones de la infraestructura
Infrastructural constraints are very important and often drive the decision to use a laptop/mobile or desktop/lab environment or some combination thereof. Two major components of the infrastructure are power (grid-based electricity) and backhaul (connectivity to the Internet). In the following table, we have a combination of the two on a granular scale akin to low, medium, and high.
List of relevant variables:
Server HW (RAM/Disk) - big, medium, little, none
Bandwidth to Data Center - big, medium, little, none
Bandwidth to Internet - big, medium, little
Power in school - enough for AP and 2 x servers, enough for one server max, not enough for any servers
Wireless access - Wireless AP, active attenna, none
More detailed break down of these details at: Networking scenarios
Size of school - 10 - 50, 51 - 100, 100 - 200
The idea is to pick your available resources on all the metrics that you know listed above. Then we can quickly say what services you can use and identify any constraints within those variables.
e.g. If school greater than 150 student, then must use wireless AP instead of active attena. If zero BW to data center, then peer to peer mesh only (or maybe still use server and attenna for local mesh?) and sneaker net to internet.
Or in reverse starting from requirements.
e.g. If 100 students and need local mesh and browsing of big libraries in data center and some browsing of Internet then must have lots of power, server with 1GB RAM for Squid and 2 x active attennas and >1Mb/s to data center and >512Kb/s to internet.
See also deployment guide underway at:
Deployment Guide
etc..
Gregorio 09:15, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
| No grid infrastructure | Grid infrastructure available, but does not work reliably | Reliable grid infrastructure | |
| No backhaul | Worst case scenario | ||
| Limited backhaul (cellular, satellite, dial-up) | |||
| Good backhaul (DSL, Cable, or anything that can be called “high speed”) | Best case scenario |
Note here we also have to consider the different approaches that a NOC can take in each country. This is hard to tabulate (at least now for me, says martin ;-) ) but we'll eventually have a grid describing it.