Oliver Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Tim Churches wrote: > > > It would also work > > very nicely as a store-and-forward facility for interchange of HL7 > > messages - Amazon S3 would effectively be the unintelligent > > data-store-and-retrieve middleman - but gee, they don't charge much - > I > > suspect that the bill for even a large path lab might only be a few > tens > > of dollars per month. Some open source code to add the smarts and > > encryption at the sending and receiving ends and you have the makings > of > > a very cheap but potentially very robust secure health data exchange > > service with an architecture rather similar to that offered by > > Healthlink etc, but with negligible per-message costs. > > Argus seems to be "open source code" that "adds the smarts and > encryption at the sending and receiving ends" and provides "a very cheap > > but potentially very robust secure health data exchange service". > > How would Amazon S3 be better than this? What would be its advantages > over using Argus?
It is the combination of Argus (and/or other things like it) plus Amazon S3 (and/or other things like it) which I had in mind. Amazon S3 and the like are just dum-but-high-capacity/high-reliability(one hopes) Internet storage engines. They need smart software at both ends: Argus or similar. But Argus uses SMTP, which is perfectly good enough for very many health comms applications, but is likely to struggle or fail when moving image files of tens or hundreds of megabytes around - that's where Internet storage facilities like Amazon S3 may be useful. Tim C _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
