Steven,
Coming from a DSL provider's background, I have to say that you have been
really lucky for the last 2 1/2 years. ^__^
As for your question, yeah, I would recommend using two NICs since you don't
want to use address translation.
Richard
""Steven V. Snead"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Richard,
>
> I thought that as far as DNS servers the primary was also first and the
> secondary was second. I guess this is not the case. I have two DSL circuit
> with Covad just yesterday a router when down in Anaheim and down when my
> e-mail server it was with FirstWorld my other DSL InternetConnect circuit
> did not miss a beat. With this had been the case everytime for the past 2
> 1/2 years one goes down and another is up (I would think their on the same
> DSLAM also). The only time I had two go down was when NorthPoint shutdown
> with warning. I think you idea of the MX records make since, but my
question
> is what about the NT box, two NIC cards ? is that what I need to make it
> work?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven V. Snead, MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Chang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 11:58 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Two DSL circuits for Fault Tolerance [7:9200]
>
>
> I discussed fault tolerance a lot before with customers who has a web site
> that would like to be up all the time using DSL lines. As far as I can
tell,
> there is just no easy way to achieve a high-level of fault tolerance
without
> running some kind of dynamic routing protocols with your ISP.
>
> Your idea of using two DNS servers won't work. When anyone tries to send
an
> email, their smtp server will randomly pick one of the authorized name
> server requesting for your IP address. Therefore, you would still have 50%
> chance of failure if one of the DSL is down. I would recommend that you
get
> some kind of load balancing device in front of these two DSL lines. Or, if
> mail is all we are concerned about, you could assign one IP from ISP A as
> the primary MX record while use IP from ISP B as a backup MX record. That
> will make sure your mail always get to the exchange server.
>
> BTW, I would not recommend using a second DSL line to backup another DSL
> line since both DSLs would probably go into the same DSLAM in the same CO
> anyway...
>
> Richard
>
> ""Steven V. Snead"" wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Load balancing would be nice but my real goal would be to have Fault
> > tolerance on my NT 4.0 box. Fault tolerance between the two DSL
> > connections, such that if one DSL fails, it will switch over to the
other
> > DSL, so that the exchange server still receive mail. My thought was to
> use
> > two DNS servers the primary pointing to one IP and the secondary
pointing
> to
> > another IP from the other DSL circuit. I'm a little lost on how that can
> be
> > set up on the server end. Two NIC cards ? I guess I need hardware but
> would
> > like to do it without NAT. I can't believe this is something that can't
be
> > done and hopefully without BGP because working with the ISP seems
> impossible
> > for this to happen.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Steven V. Snead, MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=9392&t=9200
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
