-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

3Com makes a NIC like that.  It works wonderfully.  I think it may
even load balance too, but I'm not sure.

Carric Dooley
Network Security Consultant

"I have often regretted my speech, never my silence." 
- - Xenocrates (396-314 B.C.) 



- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Rogue Bolo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Kathy Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 1:57 AM
Subject: Re: [FW1] Failover NICs?


> 
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Rogue Bolo wrote:
> 
> > It is called VRRP. It is an open standard in draft form awaiting
> > final vote. It is used by 13 major manufacturers currently and
> > does exactly what you are looking for.
> 
> nope. she wanted one system with two NICs in the same hardware box
> that would failover for each other.
>  
> > --- Kathy Chapman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > We are trying to build some fault tolerance into our Checkpoint
> > FW system (Solaris on a Sun Ultra).  Does anybody know of any
> > NICs which can be configured for failover, ie if NIC A fails,
> > then NIC B takes over for it, and assumes the failed NICs IP
> > address?
> 
> check out the alteon nics. www.alteonwebsystems.com.
> 
> - brett
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ====================================================================
> ============ 
>      To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the
> instructions at 
>                http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
> ====================================================================
> ============ 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBOUpzFFUqWOkDpMZ2EQLJXwCfdxhpoUWjgTdQOz6AmV6YXKqrLb8An0eN
Y9A6bHC97RsNnlVX7N/L7040
=fuYq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




================================================================================
     To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at
               http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
================================================================================

Reply via email to