[Lesson learned] Redundant to what point? A nationwide company with centralized operations at corporate had multiple T1 lines for voice. One line was designated as backup for voice and data communications. Premises equipment was programmed to route traffic to the backup automatically when there were faults on the main circuit. Then, one day, it happened: A major T3 line went down. The premises equipment promptly changed over to the backup circuit ... which was also dead. The circuits terminated on the same T3, so the only real redundancy was in the local loop.
When managing remote sites, the less planning and streamlining done up front, the greater the need for IT staff intervention later. Some companies see remote-control software as the silver bullet for managing remote branches with limited manpower. But it's no replacement for proper planning.
Are end users well-trained? Are effective patch-management systems in place? Are users allowed to alter their own PC configurations? All these factors can affect how much those users will rely on your support staff.
So what's the best way to physically support remote sites? It boils down to time, money and resources again. Most organizations put their emphasis on a central IT staff, which costs less and uses fewer resources, but this group can become bogged down in unnecessary--and time-eating--firefights that could have been avoided with better training, standardized systems and controls. Some alternatives to a centralized support staff model:
Discover the benefits of scalable backbone and network services for application and cloud providers.
Network automation is gaining momentum. Here's how you can drive this powerful technology to its full potential.
Subsea cable alternatives can provide a level of comfort for those concerned about disruptions. Realistically, they will continue to play a small, but critical role in the short term.
