[44956] in North American Network Operators' Group
FATPipe vs. BGP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (James Smith)
Thu Jan 3 17:43:31 2002
Message-ID: <171DAAD54475984F8F41345A0945DF9C39ECD1@hqexchange.presidio.com>
From: James Smith <jsmith@PRESIDIO.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 17:42:49 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C194A7.FAAE0A66"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C194A7.FAAE0A66
Content-Type: text/plain
Anyone deploy FATPipe boxes yet? Just got through a preso about it, they
bill it as a highly survivable VPN solution, but also as a way of getting
multiple inbound/outbound/backup pipes to work from multiple providers
without having to use BGP.
They actually use DNS with a short TTL (under 10 seconds) to do the failover
on inbound. With failover related to TTL, I can guess which way the users
want the knob to turn...
My concern is the need for the box to be your primary (authoritative) DNS in
this role, with no secondary DNS support (available in the 2.0 release, I
was told). No need to tell me how bad of an idea this is, what I'm looking
for is actual "by golly, we did it, and this is what we ran into" stories.
Especially from multi-site, multi-sub-domain sites.
I bet it is a pain to keep all those primary DNS servers in sync...
http:\\www.fatpipeinc.com
James H. Smith II NNCDS NNCSE
Systems Engineer
The Presidio Corporation
<include> fancy.sig
------_=_NextPart_001_01C194A7.FAAE0A66
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3DUS-ASCII">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2650.12">
<TITLE>FATPipe vs. BGP</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Anyone deploy FATPipe boxes yet? Just got through a =
preso about it, they bill it as a highly survivable VPN solution, but =
also as a way of getting multiple inbound/outbound/backup pipes to work =
from multiple providers without having to use BGP.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>They actually use DNS with a short TTL (under 10 =
seconds) to do the failover on inbound. With failover related to TTL, I =
can guess which way the users want the knob to turn...</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>My concern is the need for the box to be your primary =
(authoritative) DNS in this role, with no secondary DNS support =
(available in the 2.0 release, I was told). No need to tell me how bad =
of an idea this is, what I'm looking for is actual "by golly, we =
did it, and this is what we ran into" stories. Especially from =
multi-site, multi-sub-domain sites.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I bet it is a pain to keep all those primary DNS =
servers in sync...</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2><A HREF=3D"http:\\www.fatpipeinc.com" =
TARGET=3D"_blank">http:\\www.fatpipeinc.com</A></FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>James H. Smith II NNCDS NNCSE</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Systems Engineer</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>The Presidio Corporation</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2><include> fancy.sig</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C194A7.FAAE0A66--
