We have collected some questions that will be answered by two SORINTians who are experts in Disaster Recovery and Security.
The cue? Current events: from the entry into force of the NIS2 regulations, to the obvious and growing digital dependence, through the recent episodes of severe outages and complex recoveries in Spain, Portugal and parts of France, to the steady increase in cyber attacks.
Antonio D’Andrea and Marco Sorrentino, thank you for being with us today.
1) Costs
Let’s start with this topic, which is always central to business decision makers.
Is it true that DRaaS (Disaster Recovery as a Service) can lead to significant cost reductions compared to traditional disaster recovery models? And if so, how?
Antonio: Absolutely yes. DRaaS can reduce costs by 50 to 70 percent — and in some cases even up to 80 percent — depending on the business context and the technical evaluation of the project. This is not just our opinion: these data are confirmed both by external studies and by the experience gained in projects implemented here at SORINT.lab.
Marco: The savings come mainly from the elimination of many overhead costs. With DRaaS, you don’t need physical data centers, hardware maintenance or ongoing operational involvement. You also cut several hidden costs, such as those related to power, cooling, software licenses, and more.
Antonio: Exactly. A key element is the strategic use of cloud technologies. DRaaS leverages automation to enable organizations to scale dynamically, using resources only when really needed.
In traditional disaster recovery scenarios, it is common to find dozens-if not hundreds-of virtual machines replicated and running 24/7 “just in case.” This approach incurs enormous costs. But is it really indispensable?
Marco: in many cases, no. We have joined several clients in in-depth cost-benefit analyses, and the results speak for themselves: in some projects, the adoption of DRaaS has reduced disaster recovery costs by up to 80 percent.
2) Can we say, then, that DRaaS is not the ideal solution for every organization or every scenario?
Marco: It would be reductive to answer with a simple “yes” or “no.” Each project must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. There are many factors to consider: the complexity of the infrastructure, customer priorities, RTO (Recovery Time Objective) and RPO (Recovery Point Objective) requirements. Currently, our solution is based on specific technologies such as VMware, Veeam, and cloud components (cloud object storage and VMware SDDC). Some customers, for example, are more focused on speed of recovery rather than cost savings-and this too makes a difference in the choice of strategy.
Antonio: Before proposing a solution, we carefully analyze the customer’s priorities. Are you looking for fast and reliable recovery options in line with regulatory requirements? Is the data critical and sensitive, so is it critical to ensure an accurate recovery point?
Or is cost containment the determining factor?
The solution we propose-whether DRaaS-based or a more traditional approach-must always meet the criteria defined by the SLA and the specific customer and project requirements.
The value of customized DRaaS, and the flexibility of the technology mix it offers, allows us to adapt to the needs of even very different industries.
Marco: That said, for many small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), DRaaS is the ideal solution.It is particularly suitable for those who need to adapt to new or upcoming regulations, those who want to update outdated recovery strategies, or those who want to introduce modern solutions without investing excessive resources. A solution that is simple, effective, and perfectly aligned with these needs.
3) Let’s turn the question around: when is DRaaS not the ideal solution?
Antonio: There are definitely several scenarios where DRaaS is not the ideal solution. For example, when a project requires very tight control over infrastructure, hardware or software. Or in highly regulated environments, or where there are legacy systems and services with non-virtualized workloads.
If services cannot be virtualized, replicated, or provisioned, DRaaS becomes an impractical solution. Also, if technologies such as VMware or backup software such as Veeam are not used, DRaaS options are significantly reduced.
Marco Try to consider this scenario: an organization with a physical disaster recovery site already fully operational and a data center that is fully integrated into its current business model may not find sufficient value in changing its approach.
In these cases, DRaaS is not a priority, especially if cost savings are not an urgent goal.
We are talking about customers who are not planning to adopt a new disaster recovery model.
Antonio: Another aspect to consider is the recovery requirements. If a company needs extremely fast RTO values, such as near-instantaneous recovery, a traditional replication-based solution may be preferable in some configurations.
That said, these cases are less frequent, but still present.
DRaaS has built a solid reputation because, in most cases, it is the ideal solution for many companies struggling to identify the most suitable model.
In particular, it is perfect for those who want to scale easily, modernize infrastructure or increase agility, especially in simpler IT environments and in industries that allow some degree of flexibility. DRaaS has gained a solid reputation and has become a benchmark because in many cases it succeeds in meeting most business needs.
With input from a variety of sources, companies today are increasingly aware of the economic losses associated with downtime, reputational risks, binding regulations, and the importance of IT resilience and business continuity.
DRaaS, compared to traditional disaster recovery models, prioritizes certain values while still managing to address multiple organizational needs.
Learn more about it on www.sorint.com/draas