I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
In our network, Linux is approaching
"Enterprise Class" and I don't see
> I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
> (about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
> as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
> design considerations in both hardware and software.
My Norstar Meridian system has nowhere near this. We get about
Doug Shubert wrote:
I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
In our network, Linux is approaching
"Enterprise Cla
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
To turn around, let's discuss what we need to fo
> I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
> (about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
> as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
> design considerations in both hardware and software.
>
> In our network, Linux is approaching
> "Enterprise Class" an
On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 10:14, Doug Shubert wrote:
> I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
> (about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
> as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
> design considerations in both hardware and software.
>
> In our netw
> Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
>>>I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
>>>(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
>>>as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
>>>design considerations in both hardware and software.
>>
>
> To turn around, let's discus
> Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
> >>I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
> >>(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
> >>as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
> >>design considerations in both hardware and software.
> >
>
> To turn around, let's
Steven Critchfield wrote:
On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 10:14, Doug Shubert wrote:
I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and soft
Rich Adamson wrote:
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
To turn around
>> Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
>>>
>>
>> To turn around, let'
On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 13:28, WipeOut wrote:
> Steven Critchfield wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 10:14, Doug Shubert wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
> >>(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
> >>as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This w
>>> Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
>I would set the "Enterprise Class" bar at five 9's reliability
>(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
>as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
>design considerations in both hardware and software.
>>>
>>> To turn arou
> >I'd guess part of the five-9's discussion centers around how automated
> >must one be to be able to actually get close? If one assumes the loss
> >of a SIMM the answer/effort certainly is different then assuming the
> >loss of a single interface card (when multiples exist), etc.
> >
> >I woul
> 1. Moving a physical interface (whether a T1, ethernet or 2-wire pstn) is
> mostly trevial, however what "signal" is needed to detect a system failure
> and move the physical connection to a second machine/interface? (If there
> are three systems in a cluster, what signal is needed? If a three-wa
The comments below are certainly not intended as any form of negativism,
but rather to pursue thought processes for redundant systems.
> > 1. Moving a physical interface (whether a T1, ethernet or 2-wire pstn) is
> > mostly trivial, however what "signal" is needed to detect a system failure
> > an
On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 21:23, Rich Adamson wrote:
> Part of the point of many of the questions is that there really are a
> lot of dependencies on devices other then asterisk, and simply going down
> a path that says clustering (or whichever approach) can handle something
> is probably ignoring seve
On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 07:38:16PM +, WipeOut wrote:
>
> Also a failover system would typically only be 2 servers, if there were
> a cluster system there could be 10 servers in which case five 9's should
> be easy..
>
Err, no. five 9s is *never* easy.
Does your telco provide you with SLAs
Nicolas Bougues wrote:
On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 07:38:16PM +, WipeOut wrote:
Also a failover system would typically only be 2 servers, if there were
a cluster system there could be 10 servers in which case five 9's should
be easy..
Err, no. five 9s is *never* easy.
Does your telco p
>
> Does your telco provide you with SLAs that make five 9s reasonable at
> all ?
>
LOL... Our telco services could be down for several hours at a time.
We found than most US Broadband carriers (DSL and Cable) offer a
"best effort" zero SLA service. If you are using broadband as a primary
transpo
> > Using another load-balancing box (F5 or whatever) only moves the problem
> > to that box. Duplicating it, moves the problem to another box, until
> > the costs exponentially grow beyond the initial intended value of the
> > solution. The weak points become lots of other boxes and infrastructure
Hi Richard,
>Load balancers have some added value, but those that have had to deal
>with a problem where a single system within the cluster is up but not
>processing data would probably argue their actual value.
I've done quite a lot of work with clustered/ha linux configurations. I
usualy try to
WipeOut wrote:
Granted five 9's is never easy but in a cluster of 10+ servers the
system should survive just about anything short of an act of God..
You do realise that is a real dumb statement, don't you? :-)
A cluster of 10 machines, each on a different site. Guarantees from the
power company
On Fri, 2004-01-09 at 21:36, Steve Underwood wrote:
> WipeOut wrote:
>
> > Granted five 9's is never easy but in a cluster of 10+ servers the
> > system should survive just about anything short of an act of God..
>
> You do realise that is a real dumb statement, don't you? :-)
>
> A cluster of
--- Steve Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> WipeOut wrote:
>
> > Granted five 9's is never easy but in a cluster of 10+ servers the
> > system should survive just about anything short of an act of God..
>
> You do realise that is a real dumb statement, don't you? :-)
>
> A cluster of 10 m
Hi,
I don't want to drag this into a long thread, but note the original says
"the system should survive just about anything short of an act of God",
and suddenly you are talking about a reliable server and a few switches.
These are quite different things. I have yet to see a 5 x 9's server
roo
AIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 2:43 AM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Hardware to build an Enterprise
AsteriskUniversal Gateway
> Hi,
>
> I don't want to drag this into a long thread, but note the original says
> "the system sh
> I don't want to drag this into a long thread, but note the original says
> "the system should survive just about anything short of an act of God",
> and suddenly you are talking about a reliable server and a few switches.
> These are quite different things. I have yet to see a 5 x 9's server
28 matches
Mail list logo
