Server Infrastructure Documentation
A three-week engagement producing a structured reference for your server estate — hosts, roles, dependencies, and operational notes in a single living document.
¥42,000
View details
Architecture Review · ¥25,500
See your facility with clearer eyes — and a document to prove it.
A structured observation engagement for operators who want a written account of where things stand today — rack by rack, circuit by circuit — without committing to a lengthy project.
What this delivers
A written record of your co-location environment — honest, detailed, yours to keep.
When the engagement closes, you'll have a written observation report covering the physical and logical state of your facility presence. Annotated diagrams, power notes, environmental observations, and a short reference appendix — all in one document that your team can read, share, and return to.
The value isn't in the review itself — it's in having something written down. Something that doesn't live exclusively in one engineer's head, or in a folder of fragmented notes accumulated across two years of maintenance windows.
Written observation report
A structured document your team can actually read — not a slide deck or a verbal summary that dissolves after the call ends.
Annotated diagrams
Rack arrangements, power path observations, and environmental notes rendered into diagrams with clear labelling and contextual annotation.
Reference appendix
A compact reference section covering key identifiers, capacity figures, and observations that didn't belong in the main narrative but shouldn't be lost either.
Where teams often find themselves
Your facility presence has grown organically. The documentation hasn't.
Co-location environments accumulate quietly. Racks get added, circuits get repurposed, hardware gets refreshed — and the arrangement that made sense in the original deployment plan gradually diverges from what's actually installed today. The person who understood it all left last year. Or they're still there, but nobody else does.
This isn't negligence. It's the natural result of maintaining live systems under real operational pressure, where documentation consistently loses the priority battle to whatever needs fixing this week. The gap is understandable. It's also worth closing.
Rack diagrams that are two refresh cycles out of date and no one has time to update.
Power path assumptions that haven't been verified since the original facility provisioning.
Planning decisions that rely on someone's best recollection of the current hardware estate.
Onboarding engineers to a facility environment they can't read from any existing document.
Our approach
We review what's there. We write down what we find. You get the document.
The Architecture Review is a bounded engagement. We come in, observe the current state of your Japanese co-location presence, ask the questions your team already knows the answers to, and produce a written record that captures those answers in a form that survives beyond the next staff change.
We don't prescribe a remediation plan. We don't try to sell a follow-on engagement. We describe what we see — rack arrangements, power planning observations, environmental notes, the relationship between hardware and the workloads it supports — and we deliver that as a document. What your team does with it is up to them.
Rack arrangement review
We document what's installed, where it sits, how it's cabled, and how that arrangement relates to the workloads your team is running on it.
Power planning observations
Circuit assignments, redundancy posture, and any gap between assumed and observed power capacity — noted plainly without overstating risk.
Environmental observations
Cooling arrangements, temperature zoning notes, and any observable environmental conditions relevant to hardware longevity and facility planning.
Hardware-to-workload mapping
The relationship between physical hardware and the software workloads it supports — documented so that future capacity or migration decisions have a clear starting point.
What working together looks like
A straightforward engagement that fits around your team's schedule.
01
Initial scoping call
We talk through the size and structure of your co-location presence, what's already documented, and what the review should focus on. No preparation required on your end.
02
Review sessions
Working from configuration sources, facility access notes, and conversations with your team — we observe, ask questions, and note what we find. We work at a pace that doesn't disrupt your operations.
03
Draft review
Before the final document is delivered, your team gets a draft to check for factual corrections. Not for approval of our observations — just to catch anything we've misread.
04
Final delivery
The complete observation report with annotated diagrams and appendix. Delivered as a document your team owns outright — no access portal, no ongoing subscription required to read your own findings.
Investment
One flat fee. One complete document.
The Architecture Review is priced at ¥25,500. That covers the full engagement — scoping, review sessions, draft, revisions, and final delivery. No hourly billing, no scope ambiguity, no surprises at invoice.
If the engagement reveals something that warrants a separate piece of work, we'll say so plainly. There's no pressure to extend the scope. The review stands on its own.
¥25,500
/ engagement
-
Initial scoping conversation
-
Full co-location facility review
-
Rack, power, and environmental observations
-
Written observation report with annotated diagrams
-
Reference appendix
-
One round of factual corrections on draft
-
Full ownership of all deliverables
Why this works
Documentation doesn't age — assumptions do.
The reason architecture reviews produce lasting value is simple: the cost of acting on incomplete information compounds over time. Decisions made without an accurate picture of the hardware estate tend to produce more decisions that need correcting later. A written record, even an imperfect one, interrupts that cycle.
JP-focused
All review work is oriented around Japanese co-location facilities — their characteristics, documentation conventions, and the specific considerations of operating hardware in these environments.
Written first
The observation report is the product. Everything in the engagement — review sessions, diagrams, appendix — exists to support a written document that your team can actually use as a reference.
No lock-in
The deliverable is a document, not a platform subscription. When the engagement ends, you have everything. There's no ongoing access arrangement to maintain.
Our commitment
If the scope doesn't fit, we'll tell you before we start.
Before any engagement begins, we talk through your facility situation in enough detail to confirm that the Architecture Review is actually the right scope. If your environment is too large for a single review engagement, or if what you're describing calls for something different, we'll say so plainly. We'd rather have an honest conversation early than deliver something that doesn't fit your situation.
The initial conversation carries no obligation. You're not committing to anything by reaching out. If it turns out the timing isn't right or the engagement doesn't make sense for where your team is today, that's a perfectly fine outcome from our first call.
No obligation on the initial scoping call — ask anything you need to.
Scope is confirmed in writing before the engagement begins — no surprises on delivery.
Draft review round included — you can correct factual errors before final delivery.
Complete ownership of all documents — no access restrictions, no dependency on us going forward.
Getting started
A note and a brief description of your setup is enough to get things moving.
You don't need a detailed brief, a prepared spec, or any documentation already in place. Write us a short note describing roughly what your co-location presence looks like and what you're hoping to understand better. We'll come back to you within a couple of working days with a response and, if it seems like a good fit, a time for a call.
01
Send a note
A short description of your facility presence and what you'd like to understand. Use the contact form or email info@systemlayerbase.com
02
We scope together
A short call to confirm the engagement scope, timeline, and what the review will cover. Nothing to prepare beforehand.
03
Receive your report
Review sessions, draft, corrections, and final delivery. A written record of your facility that belongs to your team.
Other services
Documentation
Migration Planning
Explore the other engagements we offer.
Cloud Migration Roadmap
A planning engagement for teams considering a measured transition into Japanese cloud regions — workload inventory, dependency mapping, and a written roadmap with decision points.
¥30,500
View details
Ready when you are
If your facility documentation has drifted from reality, this is a reasonable place to start.
Write us a note about your co-location setup. No commitment required — just a conversation about what a review might actually look like for your team.
Get in touch