|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: How to achieve application reliability
Sean, First, Unix is the only way to go. :) Second, what do you suggest instead of a /19? -- James Smith, CCNA Network/System Administrator DXSTORM.COM http://www.dxstorm.com/ DXSTORM Inc. 2140 Winston Park Drive, Suite 203 Oakville, ON, CA L6H 5V5 Tel: 905-829-3389 (email preferred) Fax: 905-829-5692 1-877-DXSTORM (1-877-397-8676) On 5 Dec 1999, Sean Donelan wrote: > > On Sat, 04 December 1999, James Smith wrote: > > Our only alternative is to eliminate every single-point failure with stuff > > like high availability clustering, redundant feeds, battery backups, > > nuclear reactors, physical separate sites on different planets, etc. :-) > > (Pardon me, it's 2:00am and I'm getting punching) > > If you are using Microsoft products in your nuclear reactor, its not going > to be very reliable. They aren't designed for that purpose. > > The tools exist to make very reliable network applications, but we can't > force people to use them. So long as applications neglect to use the other > information provided by the network, they are going to be vulnerable to > single points of failure. > > Multiple A records exist for a reason. Even if you have high availability > clustering, redundant feeds, battery backups, multi-homing, multi-sites; if > you are depending on a single global network announcement there is nothing > to prevent another ISP from announcing the same prefix with a shorter AS > path length, and effectively blackholing your network. For people with > ultra-high reliablility requirements, a /19 isn't the solution. > > > > >
|