[481] in resnet
Re: Keeping traffic internal
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael King)
Sat Dec 1 17:57:21 2001
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <ECEBIACDOPGEFFBFMCFKAEDACCAA.mking@bridgew.edu>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:53:12 -0800
Reply-To: Resnet Forum <RESNET-L@listserv.nd.edu>
From: Michael King <mking@BRIDGEW.EDU>
To: RESNET-L@listserv.nd.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0112011238100.25114-100000@hal.rescomp.berkeley.edu>
Very true, most bandwith shaping products are a single point of failure.
Our current Netenforcer from Allot Communications is such a device, and it
has failed on two occasions in the past two years. (a firmware fix later and
it hasn't happened again). On both occasions it fails in an open state. It
passes traffice thru, it just don't do anything. An off hours Reboot of the
box and everything was fine. We went with the Packet shapeing application
because Students were unable to open Web pages so much bandwith was being
used, they would actually time out. Now the web speed is what you would
expect from 4 T-1's, but the P2P traffic is about modem speed.
Back to my orginal point, we are investigating a product from RADWARE, which
is not a Two Legged approach. (not an inline box). It has two physically
separate boxes (if you choose to buy the failsafe option) that will pickup
where the other one leaves off. They connect just like any other network
device.
Plus it allows you to route traffic across multiple ISPs, which is good
because we have 1 ISP for our Admin network, and 1 ISP for Resnet Network.
We're planning on scripting something that at certian times of day allow
ResNet students to use the Admin T-1's. The have stated this functionality
will be part of the next software release, but they don't have a release
date on it yet
Wow, I almost sound like i'm trying to sell it.
more info on it is located here
http://www.radware.com/content/products/link.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: Resnet Forum [mailto:RESNET-L@listserv.nd.edu]On Behalf Of Tyler
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 1:06 PM
To: RESNET-L@listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: Keeping traffic internal
as to the reasons to not get a packeteer (even though all the Cool Kids
have one): single point of network failure and cost spring to mind.
admittedly, cost may not be such a big issue for our well-endowed cousins
in scenic palo alto, but i digress :).
___________________________________________________
You are subscribed to the ResNet-L mailing list.
To subscribe, unsubscribe or search the archives,
go to http://LISTSERV.ND.EDU/archives/resnet-l.html
___________________________________________________
