OT: multi-homed mail/networking (was Re: good show)

[Fairlight]

Is it just me, or did Jay Ashworth say:
> them will be accessible.  As usual, the optimal situation is to have
> your secondaries in phsyically separate locations, on different
> backbones, just like your DNS servers.

I would question the need for separate -physical- locations.  If you can be
relatively sure about power being supplied via generator, etc., physical
location is almost irrelevant these days.  I've been told about colocations
that have multiple routes out of the same building, even though they're the
same carrier.

Multihomed or multi-routed is a must, I agree.  Multiple physical
locations?  That's not as highly rated a criterion as in ye olden days--at
least coming from people that know more than I do and have been doing it
far longer and in a focused fashion (ie., they do networking on a grander
scale, far more regularly than I).

It used to make more sense, as multihoming and multiple routes from the
same location weren't as common,   Some facilities nowadays, the only thing
that's going to cause catastrophic inaccessibility is a hurricane or the
like literally lifting the building off the ground and tossing it around.
These days, maintaining a WAN-distributed topography is often simply
tossing more money out the window than you need to.

mark->
-- 
Bring the web-enabling power of OneGate to -your- filePro applications today!

Try the live filePro-based, OneGate-enabled demo at the following URL:
               http://www2.onnik.com/~fairlite/flfssindex.html