> 1) Ipswitch will not support NIC teaming, particularly with > Peering...
Strange, I've never had a prob with this (3com and Intel teaming drivers). > Keep in mind that as you add the number of nodes, you add to the > likelihood that a server will have to lookup and forward the email > to another server. This can add traffic to your network... I really think very few people can saturate a LAN link with mail traffic, since disk I/O and CPU will bottleneck much more quickly. If a network is already taxed, it's feasible, but LAN bandwidth is relatively cheap these days (then again, I've been able to team where you haven't, thus doubling/tripling bandwidth at will). Vis-a-vis CPU utilization due directly to network traffic, since a peering setup is designed to distribute disk, network, and CPU across multiple servers, overall host resource consumption should go down as you add more servers (even if ratios shift to more network resources being used). If WAN connections are being used, one does have to be much more careful and truly model traffic to determine how much will be intra-peer, how much will be inter-peer, how much remote delivery from a peer to the outside. Also on the high end, if your network latency and number of peers keep SMTP delivery processes open for prolonged periods of time, you could starve the local machine if it's also trying to perform local delivery and message retrieval. This is why I recommend using asymmetric or "bridgehead" peers that have no local userbase, thus eliminating resource contention with mailbox server tasks. -Sandy ------------------------------------ Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
