Survey of Digital Infrastructures and ServicesCONUL DIGITAL SERVICES & INFRASTRUCTURE SUB -GROUP

CONUL Members

DSI Sub-group - Terms of ReferenceIdentify and develop major issues and strategic priorities.

Identify and develop opportunities for cooperation and collaboration among CONUL libraries.

Identify and develop key relationships outside of CONUL.

To continue to identify affinities or overlap with other CONUL groups’ areas of enquiry.

To continue to identify an appropriate structure for CONUL to address the topic in the longer term.

To identify and track work underway, existing infrastructures and digitisation resources, pertinent expertise, policies etc., as well as additional relevant issues.

To consider a range of issues relevant to OPEN ACCESS.

Survey•Gather information about existing repository or archival information systems in use by CONUL libraries

•Based around the OAIS Reference Model• OAIS Functional Model (ingest, archival storage, disaster recovery, access, data management,

preservation planning, resourcing & skills)

• OAIS Information Model (SIPs, AIPs, metadata)

• Operating Environment (community, reporting, strategic planning)

•Survey yielded 14 responses from 10 institutions

Repository Maturity

Less than one year

One to three years

Four to five years

Six to seven years

Eight to ten years

Over ten years

System is currently being implemented

REPOSITORY MATURITY

Repository Technology

DSpace 17%

Eprints6%

Digital Commons12%

Fedora Commons47%

ContentDM (OCLC)6%

Pure12%

REPOSITORY TECHNOLOGY

Repository Alignment

Yes

No

Don't Know

CONSIDER MIGRATING TO ALIGN WITH OTHER CONUL MEMBERS?

Storage

•Storage procured by the library’s parent institution (57.1%)

•Rest split between local, hosted and third party-managed

•No institution using cloud storage as the main object store

•Canonical copy mostly stored offline (CDs/DVDs, disconnected external HDs)

•57.1% (8/14) using SAN storage 28.6% (4/14) using NAS

•Content managed in TB: 3 institutions > 10TB, mostly < 1TB

•71.4% (10/14) allow the repository to arrange data on filesystem (Akubra/Modeshape)

Backups

•Online backups 64.3%

•Nearline 71.4%

•Offline 42.9%

•Many have an instance of each, demonstrating multiple levels of backup policies

•Regular test of backups: 21.4% (3/14) regularly test, 42.9% (6/14) no schedule

•78.6% back up AIPs offsite

•50% (7/14) are continuously replicated to redundant copy, immediately available

Data Preservation

Yes

No

STAFF RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANNING PRESERVATION

Data Preservation

YesNo

PERFORM FIXITY CHECKS

Data Preservation

Yes

No

DOCUMENTED PRESERVATION POLICIES

Trustworthiness

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Trusted Repository Audit Checklist (TRAC)

Data Seal of Approval

Not applicable

Assessment of Trustworthiness

Staffing

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Ingest Data Management Preservation Planning Management Software development Systems Administration /Operations

Archival Storage Access

FTE per OAIS function

Skills: Data Management

Skills: Preservation

Skills: DevOps

Conclusion•Technology aspects are in hand• Infrastructure

• Storage

• Backups

•Data Preservation is not considered a priority

•Room for improvement on all aspects

•All at the early stages

•Opportunities to share skills – not “reinvent the wheel”

•Survey results to be published on Github

DSI Sub-group - Terms of ReferenceIdentify and develop major issues and strategic priorities.

Identify and develop opportunities for cooperation and collaboration among CONUL libraries.

Identify and develop key relationships outside of CONUL.

To continue to identify affinities or overlap with other CONUL groups’ areas of enquiry.

To continue to identify an appropriate structure for CONUL to address the topic in the longer term.

To identify and track work underway, existing infrastructures and digitisation resources, pertinent expertise, policies etc., as well as additional relevant issues.

To consider a range of issues relevant to OPEN ACCESS.