cc:Mail Link to SMTP Undeliverable Message: Unknown user: CNET T221C
Thu, 09 Apr 98 11:30:33 -0600

--simple boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

our philosophy on redundancy in servers is to build all the servers pretty
much identical, run adaptec raid controllers and mirror everything.

we have a couple of workstations that are identical to the servers as far
as motherboard, video, ram etc. so if a server were to die we could easily
commandere the workstation and move everything over to there in about 15


At 10:18 AM 4/8/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Nope -- MUCH MUCH more -- and I've found pricing on the Vinca product --
>$4,499 per two servers. FCOL, that's rape and robbery! Only a FOOL
>would pay it when there are MUCH less expensive solutions around.
>Consider an ISP with six servers.... You'd be looking at nearly $14,000 to
>protect them all, when you COULD just mirror/RAID the drives, and have a
>scheduled backup/restore of the complete primary server to a secondary,
>nightly or even hourly. In the UNLIKELY event that a RAID system fails,
>you can change the IP addresses on the backup system, disconnect the
>primary, and be up with only one hour's data loss (or, if the RAID wasn't
>the point of failure, cable the drives into the backup box, and away you go
>with NO loss of data).
>And VINCA's product claims it doesn't even support IIS 4 at this time! It
>only replicates SQL and Exchange! Octopus at least provides total
>mirroring of ALL data regardless of application.... (for a price)
>At 09:54 AM 4/8/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>I thought Octopus was only like $1000 or soo.....
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Jeff Woods []
>>> Sent: Wednesday, 08 April, 1998 9:52 AM
>>> To:
>>> Subject: RE: NT Server Mirroring
>>> At 08:50 AM 4/8/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>> >Try Octopus or....Bugger, I can't remember the other one
>>> that was good.
>>> Octopus was a FIVE FIGURE price tag the last time I looked
>>> into it. WAY
>>> out of line for a product like that.
>>> What's wrong with round-robin DNS and IIS 4.0's content replication?
>>> Sure, in a failure, you have to modify the DNS to eliminate
>>> hits to the
>>> dead server, but that's FREE....
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>> NTISP Mailing List
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> NTISP Mailing List
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> NTISP Mailing List

NTISP Mailing List

--simple boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; name="RFC822.TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="RFC822.TXT"

Received: from by (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.00.01)
; Thu, 09 Apr 98 11:28:15 -0600
Return-Path: <>
Received: from by with SMTP
( id AA03338; Thu, 9 Apr 1998 11:04:47 -0500
Received: from by (NTList 3.02.13) id ea254336; Thu, 9 Apr 1998 08:54:53 -0700
Received: from oldwww ([]) by THE-SPA.COM
with SMTP (IPAD 2.05) id 6863800 ; Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:57:25 EST
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 11:58:54 -0400
From: matthew <>
Subject: RE: NT Server Mirroring
In-Reply-To: <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-Id: <199804091557.6863800@THE-SPA.COM>
X-Listmember: []

--simple boundary--