Some onus has to be on AHS and ATB as well. If you design your infrastructure and applications around a single point of failure (in this case, one physical data center), you open up the possibility of this type of disaster taking you out of business. Is it an acceptable level of risk? Probably it was, as data center catastrophes like this are rare.
I would be asking, why wasn't their a second data center where there applications and servers were hosted out of? I take it there DR plan did not account for total loss of a data center, and while I understand it is extremely expensive and complex, the technology is out there.
Not trying to defend Shaw too much, they are going to take a ton of heat for this, and rightfully so.
|