So...I think my brain may have fallen completely out of my head which does not bode well for this assignment. For the life of me, I could not remember to post it and am now trying to do it while I get ready for work. Anyway, here it is.
LOCKSS: Does a Library Good?
An Investigation into the
Implementation of LOCKSS
Caitlin Hoffman
FIS1311, Section 4
Colin Furness
November 8, 2007
“…Let us save what remains: not by vaults and locks which fence them from the public eye…but by such a multiplication of copies, as shall place them beyond the reach of accident” (Thomas Jefferson as cited on www.lockss.org/lockss/Home, 2007). This quotation appears at the top of the LOCKSS web site and is very much the impetus for the project. LOCKSS, or Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe, an international non-profit endeavour aims to provide tools and support to libraries for the preservation of web-published materials (www.lockss.org/lockss/Home, 2007). The project was initiated by Stanford University to help libraries everywhere maintain their collections by housing copies of digital materials, stressing the importance of long term survival. By supporting this long term survival, libraries are able to uphold their roles as “memory organizations” allowing them to “transmit today’s intellectual, cultural, and historical output to the future” (www.lockss.org/lockss/About_LOCKSS, 2007).
In order to further explore LOCKSS, the following scenario will be considered: a small academic library with a very limited budget concerned with the preservation of its web content is considering implementing LOCKSS in order to address this issue. Let the following information be considered:
Implementation of LOCKSS would mean no longer worrying about loss of material that has come to be associated with loss of subscription (www.lockss.org/lockss/For_Librarians, 2007). And librarians need not worry about the loss of control over the material as LOCKSS is not interested in removing custody from libraries but rather sheltering the information from various threats (Fox, 2007). LOCKSS seeks to “empower libraries, not in any way replace the values or responsibilities libraries have traditionally maintained” (Fox, 2007, p. 23). They strive to do so easily and cost effectively, with technology that is “open source, peer-to-peer, decentralized digital preservation infrastructure” (www.lockss.org/lockss/Home, 2007).
The objective is, using “the LOCKSS software to turn a low cost PC into a digital preservation appliance (a LOCKSS box)” (www.lockss.org/lockss/How_It_Works, 2007). It is important to note that this computer will be dedicated exclusively to the running of LOCKSS. Expensive hardware is not necessary, as LOCKSS neither requires nor benefits from it (www.lockss.org/lockss/Installing_LOCKSS, 2007). Transforming the computer into a LOCKSS box involves simply downloading and burning a CD Image, provided free of charge, and installing it on the chosen computer (www.lockss.org/lockss/Installing_LOCKSS, 2007). Updates are applied automatically, and the system is designed to ensure as little staff intervention as possible (Fox, 2007). Once online the box requires as little as 15 minutes to an hour of maintenance per month (www.lockss.org/lockss/Installing_LOCKSS, 2007).
Before collection can begin LOCKSS must obtain permission from publishers whose content they would like to preserve. This is usually done by the LOCKSS Alliance and not by individual libraries or librarians (www.lockss.org/lockss/For_Librarians, 2007). Collection is then done via a web crawler (www.lockss.org/lockss/How_It_Works, 2007). To provide access to the preserved content, LOCKSS boxes integrate with web proxies and caches. The boxes intercept requests from the browsers; the request is first forwarded to the publisher, and only if content is not returned does the preserved copy get used (www.lockss.org/lockss/How_It_Works, 2007).
Concerns raised by experts, in regards to LOCKSS seem to center around issues of trust. Seadle (2006) suggests that “in the digital world trusting a single provider, a single institution, and a single archive represents the real risk” (p. 76). LOCKSS is aware of such concerns, stating that one of its founding principles is that “a digital preservation system needs to build confidence in its users” (www.lockss.org/lockss/About_LOCKSS, 2007). This is done by a commitment to authenticity and integrity. For LOCKSS it is imperative that any information contained within its boxes retains its authenticity, which Fox argues is at the heart of their approach (2007). As he points out, “the reliability of a long-term preservation effort is based upon the ability of the archive to preserve the authentic digital representation of an object, no matter what the original format.” (Fox, 2007, p. 24) Seadle, a member of the LOCKSS Alliance Technical Policy Committee (2006) provides a nice summary about the commitment to integrity in his paper. He explains that “LOCKSS validates the integrity of works it archives by comparing multiple copies of the digital object on multiple servers…[requiring] at least six LOCKSS caches to hold a work before it can make a reasonable guarantee of its integrity” (Seadle, 2006, p. 76). He also speaks to the issue of authenticity stating that when errors occur “changing the digital copy does…create a problem with authenticity…LOCKSS has addressed this problem by a technique whereby it keeps each authentic version of the original” (Seadle, 2006, p. 76).
LOCKSS builds further confidence by providing information about funding for the project, listing major contributors such as: The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation whose mission is to provide grants in areas including scholarly communications and research information technology (www.mellon.org, 2007), The National Science Foundation that “promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education” (www.nsf.gov/funding/, 2005) and The Library of Congress that works to “sustain and preserve a universal collection of knowledge and creativity for future generations” (www.loc.gov/about/ ,2007).
It is important to reiterate that LOCKSS is open source which means that individual libraries can modify the system to better suit their needs (Corrado, 2005). However, it does not seem that this is the aim or even the advantage of LOCKSS. The purpose is to allow conversion of a “personal computer into a digital preservation appliance” (www.lockss.org/lockss/About_LOCKSS, 2007). The appliance is then symbolically locked away in the hopes that “‘bad guys’ have trouble finding and destroying all copies” (www.lockss.org/lockss/For_Librarians, 2007).
Upon reviewing information on LOCKSS, it seems not only feasible but also sensible to implement LOCKSS at the aforementioned academic library. There is very little if any cost associated with implementation. The software is free; the only cost to the library is for hardware, which they likely already have, and system administration which could be as little as an hour per month (www.lockss.org/lockss/For_Librarians, 2007). The LOCKSS team is very dedicated to the ideas they espouse and are committed to the efficiency and effectiveness of the project. In an age where information seems to be becoming more and more important, and the issue of leasing versus ownership of that information more and more relevant, LOCKSS would be an incredibly useful tool. And despite concerns raised, this seems to be the general consensus. Seadle admits that LOCKSS is not perfect “but it works, and has been tested. Few if any alternative digital archiving systems can claim equivalent practical experience” (2006, p. 77). Fox suggests “the development team has taken great pains…to produce a very reliable system and this does seem to be a very promising approach that reinforces traditional library values” (2007, p. 25-26). At present, most reactions to LOCKSS originate from information professionals as LOCKSS is primarily implemented within libraries. However a new initiative, blog preservation was recently announced (www.lockss.org/lockss/Home, 2007) and with this movement, more feedback from outside the information profession may soon be available.
REFERENCES CITED
Corrado, Edward M. (2005). The Importance of Open Access, Open Source, and Open
Standards for Libraries. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship. Retrieved on October November 5, 2007, from http://www.istl.org/05-spring/article2.html
Fox, Robert (2007). The double bind of e-journal collections. OCLC Systems & Services
23 (1), 21-29.
Seadle, Michael (2006). A Social Model for Archiving Digital Serials: LOCKSS.
Serials Review 32(2), 73-77.
Andrew W. Mellon Foundation (2007). Retrieved on November 4, 2007, from
http://www.mellon.org/
Library of Congress (n.d). Retrieved on November 4, 2007, from
http://www.loc.gov/about/
LOCKSS (2007). Retrieved on November 4, 5, 7, 2007, from
http://www.lockss.org/lockss/Home
National Science Foundation (2007). Retrieved on November 4, 2007, from http://www.nsf.gov/funding/
No comments:
Post a Comment