nanog mailing list archives
Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture
From: Brandon Ross <bross () sockeye com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:03:54 -0400 (EDT)
On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Neil J. McRae wrote:
Anyone doing this in their network? Is there validity in the claims in this white paper? Anyone looked at the Alcatel product that apparently funded this paper?I'd believe the numbers in this, what I don't believe yet though is that there are products available that true give the same level of redundancy that having two boxes does...
I've always found that these types of papers and products always miss one big area of failure, at least in my experience. What happens when the highly redundant device is skewered by a fork lift? Yes, I've had this happen. At least if you have a dual router config, and separate those routers physically, you have a chance of surviving such problems. -- Brandon Ross AIM: BrandonNR VP Operations ICQ: 2269442 Sockeye Networks
Current thread:
- Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Pete Kruckenberg (Apr 09)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Neil J. McRae (Apr 10)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Brandon Ross (Apr 10)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Peter E. Fry (Apr 10)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Brandon Ross (Apr 10)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Brandon Ross (Apr 10)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Neil J. McRae (Apr 10)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Jim Deleskie (Apr 10)