Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 10:10:20 +0100 (BST) From: Jim Dixon <jdd@vbc.net> To: Damian Hamill <damian@cablenet.net> Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Multi-homed - Load Balancing - No Single Point of Failure Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.91.970816095738.19320B@avon-gw.uk1.vbc.net> In-Reply-To: <33F45307.ABD322C@cablenet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 15 Aug 1997, Damian Hamill wrote: > Put it this way, the bandwidth limiting function of the ET card would be > really useful in our situation. Bandwidth limiting isn't a function of the ET card. It's done with software. We have had our own bandwidth limiting software for a year or so... > > Our experience is that the routers themselves are disgustingly > > reliable if you don't fiddle around with the source code -- they > > simply don't fail. hence the comment regarding fiddling around with the source code. We do a lot of that. One of the problems with the ET card from our perspective is the lack of source code. We have source code for everything we use except for the ET cards that we bought for evaluation a couple of years ago (and now rarely use). > Bummer I was going to put 2 links per machine (There are two ports on > the SDL card after all and I've bought the dual port option ET card). > Is that simply because if the machine bombs you lose two links as > opposed to one ? No ... the original question was about multi-homing, etc. You can of course multi-home with one router. But if that router goes down both of your backbone links are gone, you are out of business. If you have two routers, each handling one of the backbone links, and one have them goes down, you simply have less bandwidth towards the core of the Internet. This makes it a lot easier to sleep at night. -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSI.3.91.970816095738.19320B>