This is the second of a 3 part series centered around analyzing the pro’s and con’s of a colocation versus a Disaster-Recovery-as-a-Service (DRaaS) and figuring out which is better.

To read the first part in this series, please read Taking a Closer Look at Colocation .

DRaaS solutions are emerging as a popular and powerful new method for protecting organization data. But what is making DRaaS solutions so popular? I believe there are three primary reasons:

Pros
Cost – DRaaS offers users the lowest true cost of ownership. A monthly service charge is drastically cheaper than the costs of a colocation . There are no up front capital expenditures required and no long-term costs associated with maintaining hardware, software and facilities. The DRaaS pricing scales to match the resources used. This alleviates the requirement of the user to pay full costs of infrastructure and the user simply pays for what they use.

Ease and Flexibility – DRaaS allow the user to leverage turnkey operations that results in a much quicker protection process than a colocation can offer. No extra hardware or provisioning is required for setup. DraaS solutions also allow for a much greater protection-level flexibility than colocations can offer. The user is able to configure the protection solution as dictated by their own security needs rather than having a forced set of protection requirements as is often the case with colocation.

Specialized Support – Unlike colocation who’s service span many different purposes, a DRaaS company has the single focus of providing disaster recovery and business continuity services. Because of this, DRaaS companies offer specialized support designed to help with the disaster recovery process and even planning.

Cons
Overcommitting Network Resources – Sometimes a DRaaS provider will overcommit their network resources. For example, it may have 100 subscribers, but are only able to handle up to 60 concurrent failover connections. This will result in degraded recovery performance for the user.

Geographic Proximity – Small DRaaS providers will suffer from the same geographic latency issues that colocation centers suffer. It is important that the DRaaS have multiple data centers in different locations. This can result in longer replication and recovery times for the user.

Large Disaster Recoveries/Failovers May Temporarily Increase Expense – Large recoveries will inadvertently use more resources which will ultimately increase costs. It is important to understand the pricing structure and know charges and fees outside of normal operations.

When compared to a colocation, DRaaS offers a more cost effective and highly specialized service. The user is able to protect infrastructure using only the specific requirements they need at a far more affordable cost. In the event the user needs it, DRaaS providers have specialized support trained to assist the user. These are all things that a colocation cannot offer.

Now that we understand the pro’s and con’s of each and have understood what each offers the user it begs the question; which is a better investment for business?

Tune in to the next blog to learn more about which solution ultimately is the best investment for businesses.

To read more about the comparison of a colocation vs a DRaaS, read the full whitepaper here: Colocation vs. DRaaS: See the Upside of Each.

Yoav Naveh