[HN Gopher] New physical AWS Data Transfer Terminals let you upl...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       New physical AWS Data Transfer Terminals let you upload to the
       cloud faster
        
       Author : vinni2
       Score  : 43 points
       Date   : 2024-12-02 07:41 UTC (5 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (aws.amazon.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (aws.amazon.com)
        
       | DamonHD wrote:
       | Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of
       | tapes hurtling down the highway.
       | 
       | - Andrew S. Tanenbaum
        
         | aitchnyu wrote:
         | I just learned the AWS truck has been retired for months
         | https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/aws-retires-snowm...
        
           | thanksgiving wrote:
           | I wonder how this process worked in practice. Do you simply
           | send your only one set of hard disks and hope for the best?
           | Do you keep your original data on one set of disks, copy it
           | to another set of disks and send it off? Do you make multiple
           | copies of the same data and send them all together on the
           | same truck? Multiple copies on multiple trucks? How would you
           | do reconciliation on the other end once the disks arrive at
           | the destination?
           | 
           | Like everything feels so simple and straightforward from afar
           | but once I try to actually reason about something even the
           | simplest of tasks feels complicated.
        
             | jamessb wrote:
             | > I wonder how this process worked in practice. Do you
             | simply send your only one set of hard disks and hope for
             | the best?
             | 
             | No, you don't put your own disks in the
             | Snowmobile/Snowball/Snowclone. It contains disks, so when
             | it arrives you connect it to your network and copy data
             | onto it, and then it is driven to an Amazon datacentre.
             | 
             | See, e.g.
             | https://docs.aws.amazon.com/snowball/latest/developer-
             | guide/...
             | 
             | https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-importexport-
             | snowball-t...
        
               | thanksgiving wrote:
               | Thank you. That makes much more sense. So this way once
               | the data is on the AWS device it is Amazon.com's
               | responsibility so the customer doesn't need to worry
               | about the truck or whatever.
        
               | hulitu wrote:
               | > so when it arrives you connect it to your network and
               | copy data onto it, and then it is driven to an Amazon
               | datacentre.
               | 
               | And if there is an accident on the road, bad luck. /s
        
       | oatmeal_croc wrote:
       | Judging by the locations (New York and LA) I wonder if this is to
       | cater to folks from production houses who want to upload large
       | video files for processing or backup.
        
         | bigs wrote:
         | Or law firms with large discovery data sets
        
           | aitchnyu wrote:
           | How big are they? I thought its the 100gb order of magnitude
           | as (dead tree) libraries.
        
             | berbec wrote:
             | It adds up quick. I know of a law firm (under a 100
             | employees) with over 20TB.
        
               | bbatha wrote:
               | That's still peanuts, you can get consumer grade HDDs
               | with that capacity in a single drive. A business grade
               | line would have no trouble uploading all of that data in
               | less than a week, even with a bunch of extenuating
               | circumstances.
        
               | BrentOzar wrote:
               | > no trouble uploading all of that data in less than a
               | week
               | 
               | When you're doing e-discovery, deadlines are often
               | measured in days - not just for the upload time, but for
               | the analysis and finding the needle in the haystack.
        
               | oatmeal_croc wrote:
               | I'd imagine with LLMs today, discovery work is probably
               | done on the cloud by bots.
        
               | bigs wrote:
               | A few years ago there was definitely document processing
               | automation and query based filtering but still alot of
               | human work.
               | 
               | I assume you're right and AI now does some of the work
               | but I doubt all of it. Also how reliable would the AI
               | be... you'd hate to not have critical evidence at trial
               | because you trusted the AI fully and it missed something.
               | 
               | Discovery data includes audio, video, social site data,
               | as well as the usual documents and emails.
        
               | akira2501 wrote:
               | It'd be a great way to get sued for negligence. You can't
               | even assume the counterparty has correctly put everything
               | into discovery for you. What you don't know is what gets
               | you into trouble.
               | 
               | An example from the Karen Reed case, the police, somehow,
               | uploaded a video that had been put through a "mirror
               | filter" and thus showed a vehicle in the opposite
               | orientation from reality. Is your LLM going to notice
               | that?
        
               | bigs wrote:
               | Also gotta think of what else is using the corporate
               | internet pipe you can't drown it in one aws upload for
               | days.
        
               | eightys3v3n wrote:
               | Some smaller businesses may have a huge data store, but
               | not the money to pay for a business grade internet
               | connection to upload it in a reasonable amount of time.
               | I've worked for clients who have a 10 megabit full duplex
               | fiber connection for over $1,000 a month (probably
               | because of low ISP competition and because they were in a
               | newly built, low density area). If they were working on
               | migrating to the cloud, they would certainly consider
               | taking a few hard drives one time to AWS rather than
               | maxing their 10 MB full duplex connection for weeks or
               | months.
        
             | bigs wrote:
             | Hmm. A couple years ago I think one large firm I knew their
             | aws instance had about 400tb I think. Constantly growing
             | with new cases.
             | 
             | They had instances around the world this was just one.
        
       | arjvik wrote:
       | > Don't be surprised if there are no AWS signs in the building or
       | room. This is for security reasons to keep your work location as
       | secret as possible.
       | 
       | Huh?
        
         | trallnag wrote:
         | From time to time around midnight Bezos can be seen peeking
         | through the "A" of random AWS signs. This prevents that
        
       | vladde wrote:
       | I don't think I've ever handled so much data I'd need to increase
       | data throughput.
       | 
       | How much are we talking? Like petabytes? (Do you just stroll in
       | with on a huge disk array?)
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | I don't think it's really so much about throughput as it is
         | about avoiding any ingress chargers at all.
        
           | IanCal wrote:
           | Does aws charge ingress?
           | 
           | I've got a good connection for the UK but still about a 100
           | meg upload. I have external drives that are 4TB, so if
           | everything goes perfectly that could take about two full days
           | to upload.
        
           | kondro wrote:
           | AWS doesn't charge for ingress.
        
             | canucker2016 wrote:
             | FTA: "There will be no per GB charge for the data transfer
             | if you upload data into AWS Regions in the same continent
             | of your location."
             | 
             | N.B. I'm not contradicting the parent, but reframing the
             | concept - it seems that the Data Transfer Terminal is
             | ALREADY in AWS so ingress isn't a thing since your data is
             | ALREADY in AWS as soon as you connect the optic fiber cable
             | to whatever storage you've brought onsite. But since you're
             | only renting the connection, your data can't stay forever
             | in AWS unless you copy to S3 or somewhere else in AWS.
        
         | unsnap_biceps wrote:
         | They mention it as a way to take your snowball and upload it
         | and walk out and continue using it without shipping it back and
         | forth. Those look to go into the 210 TB range of raw storage.
         | 
         | In the past, at some companies I was at, I could see using
         | something like this once a quarter to upload full quarterly
         | backups, depending on the price per hour.
        
         | Joe8Bit wrote:
         | In a previous role we used their (first party) physical
         | transfer appliances to upload ~600PB of video into S3. It was a
         | complex logistical exercise to take it from the physical SANs,
         | but the AWS specialists we worked with were great and it went
         | without a hitch.
        
         | KaiserPro wrote:
         | I think it depends on your network connection.
         | 
         | We used a snowball a couple of times to either move data from
         | S3 to or it.
         | 
         | In some cases its because we didn't have enough local storage
         | to shuffle the data, or because we only had a 100 meg net link
         | and a couple of TBs to move.
        
       | unsnap_biceps wrote:
       | I presume that given they mention that it only supports public
       | endpoints, that it's just a directly peered connection on the
       | public internet and there's no special security stuff at play
       | here?
        
         | vineyardmike wrote:
         | They probably mentioned public endpoints to highlight that they
         | allow access to AWS services but they're not renting out access
         | to a massive bandwidth pipe for non-customers or to upload to
         | non-AWS. The "public endpoints" part probably is used to warn
         | customers that existing technical limitations apply wrt
         | abilities- eg you can't dump data directly to the S3 data
         | plane, you still have to go through the public API.
         | 
         | Considering the fiber connection is "part of the AWS network",
         | it may not have access to the outside internet, but also
         | contextually probably doesn't have any privileged access to AWS
         | servers.
        
           | unsnap_biceps wrote:
           | My statement that it's on the public internet is more that
           | it's directly connected to someone like level3 and not a
           | direct fiber drop to an AWS datacenter.
           | 
           | I would be surprised if the building in NYC has direct fiber
           | to IAD or if the building in LA has direct fiber to SFO.
        
       | Snoozus wrote:
       | It looks like there is no local buffer, so one needs to stick
       | around till the upload is done? Did anyone see a mention of
       | upload bandwidth?
        
         | canucker2016 wrote:
         | from the FAQ, https://aws.amazon.com/data-transfer-
         | terminal/faqs/                   - What is the connection type?
         | - Each Data Transfer Terminal facility will have at least two
         | (2) 100G optical fiber cables that are connected to the AWS
         | network.                   - What are the key requirements for
         | preparing my device to use the Data Transfer Terminal facility?
         | - To prepare for using the Data Transfer Terminal facility and
         | connecting to the network, you need to ensure your uploading
         | device is prepared to connect to the network. You should have
         | the following for an optimal data upload experience:
         | * A transceiver type 100G LR4 QSFP             * An active IP
         | auto configuration (DHCP)             * Up-to-date
         | software/transceiver drivers
         | 
         | Also, from https://aws.amazon.com/data-transfer-
         | terminal/pricing/:                   Per port charge for data
         | transfer              US to US @ $300         US to EU @ $500
         | US to Other @ Contact us
        
       | solardev wrote:
       | I wonder if this will cause devices like ATM skimmers to pop up
       | at these secret locations, skimming the traffic via MITM attacks
       | on the network or tampered laptops.
        
         | averageRoyalty wrote:
         | They appear to be rooms inside data centers, so it's pretty
         | doubtful.
        
       | DonHopkins wrote:
       | Are the facilities available to rent late at night for LAN
       | parties?
       | 
       | And do they serve good refreshments?
        
       | Havoc wrote:
       | I would have thought download would be more interesting. Dodge
       | the egress charges on cloud migrations
        
         | canucker2016 wrote:
         | Egress charges for migrations hasn't been a problem since 2024
         | March.
         | 
         | from https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/free-data-transfer-out-
         | to-i...                   We believe this choice must include
         | the one to migrate your data to another cloud provider or on-
         | premises. That's why, starting today, we're waiving data
         | transfer out to the internet (DTO) charges when you want to
         | move outside of AWS.              If you need more than 100
         | gigabytes of data transfer out per month while transitioning,
         | you can contact AWS Support to ask for free DTO rates for the
         | additional data. It's necessary to go through support because
         | you make hundreds of millions of data transfers each day, and
         | we generally do not know if the data transferred out to the
         | internet is a normal part of your business or a one-time
         | transfer as part of a switch to another cloud provider or on
         | premises.              We will review requests at the AWS
         | account level. Once approved, we will provide credits for the
         | data being migrated. We don't require you to close your account
         | or change your relationship with AWS in any way. You're welcome
         | to come back at any time. We will, of course, apply additional
         | scrutiny if the same AWS account applies multiple times for
         | free DTO.
        
           | EwanToo wrote:
           | If you request this, AWS requires:
           | 
           | "After your move away from AWS services, within the 60-day
           | period, you must delete all remaining data and workloads from
           | your AWS account, or you can close your AWS account."
           | 
           | So egress charges are still a significant problem.
           | 
           | https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/faqs/#Data_transfer_fees_when_mov.
           | ..
        
       | greatgib wrote:
       | Just for a reference of the price, it will be 300$ per hour in US
       | and 500$ in EU.
       | 
       | That looks quite expensive in my opinion, even if this target big
       | professionals.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-12-07 23:01 UTC)