From: marty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Ok, so now you have redundant routes to your network. The
>network can exist
>> in multiple physical locations connected by a VLAN link to
>make it appear
>> all on the one subnet. Each of your ISP routes would go to
>the different
>> physical locati
> You can define multiple routes to a network. For example, you may have a
> connection via OzEmail and Access One and define routes through both
> providers. BGP will advertise them both and external clients will choose
> their best route (or possibly load balance between them).
which is why p
From: marty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>sorry if this is a dumb question:
>can you have multiple routes to a single IP ??
>surely at some point you have to have a SPF...
Not a dumb question at all.
You can define multiple routes to a network. For example, you may have a
connection via OzEmail
On Wed, 9 Aug 2000, Roland Turner wrote:
> John Wiltshire wrote:
>
> > Just because there is a single IP address doesn't make it a single point of
> > failure. As you mentioned, it is possible to have a farm of mail servers,
> > though you forget that you can have multiple routes from the inter
Hey Raz,
See Below.
Roland Turner wrote:
>
> Matt Allen wrote:
>
> > I know exactly what happened but I dont think im at liberty to say.
> >
> > If you knew the chain of events you would switch over to "awww shit. that sucks
> > and is bad luck" mode, i know i did.
>
> Interesting. I'm skepti
Matt Allen wrote:
> I know exactly what happened but I dont think im at liberty to say.
>
> If you knew the chain of events you would switch over to "awww shit. that sucks
> and is bad luck" mode, i know i did.
Interesting. I'm skeptical, but perhaps you can answer this: were the
simultaneous a
Roland Turner wrote:
...snip
> (Notes:
> - For those who don't follow, the problem is that having a single MX
> means that if that MX is down, the domain's entire mail service is down.
> - Telstra is not the only large ISP that exposes itself this way. I am
> not suggesting that Telstra is t
Guys,
I know exactly what happened but I dont think im at liberty to say.
If you knew the chain of events you would switch over to "awww shit. that sucks
and is bad luck" mode, i know i did.
They *are* working on the issues and its funny to see everyones point of view
(and its fine to have one)
John Wiltshire wrote:
> Just because there is a single IP address doesn't make it a single point of
> failure. As you mentioned, it is possible to have a farm of mail servers,
> though you forget that you can have multiple routes from the internet
> channeling into the farm, with multiple Cisco
From: Roland Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>(Notes:
>- For those who don't follow, the problem is that having a single MX
>means that if that MX is down, the domain's entire mail
>service is down.
>- Telstra is not the only large ISP that exposes itself this way. I am
>not suggesting that Te
Roland Turner wrote:
> Jamie Honan wrote:
>
> > > Mail service outages can only happen to the grossly incompetent, the
> > > disinterested
> >
> > > Major ISPs have no excuse for mail service outages at all.
>
> It is not expensive, snip. Telstra, however,
> appears
Jamie Honan wrote:
> > Mail service outages can only happen to the grossly incompetent, the
> > disinterested
>
> > Major ISPs have no excuse for mail service outages at all.
>
> Ouch.
>
> Telstra should make their own excuses, but this is a very hard
> one.
>
> Maybe what you assert would be
> Mail service outages can only happen to the grossly incompetent, the
> disinterested
> Major ISPs have no excuse for mail service outages at all.
Ouch.
Telstra should make their own excuses, but this is a very hard
one.
Maybe what you assert would be possible with a lot, lot more
expenditur
13 matches
Mail list logo
