Re: [LARTC] Commercial Alternatives

["Brad Davidson" <kiloman@oatmail.org>]

Kirby C. Bohling said:
> I'm guessing it has two interfaces.  Hence the sentence:
>
>> > Yes, but not in sense that traffic comes in one interface and goes
>> out another

The fact that it does NOT come in one interface and go out another implies
to me that there's only one interface. If there's two interfaces, it goes
in one and out another.. which is what he says it's NOT doing :P

> The one interface connects to the local lan.  The other connects to a
> network that can route to all of your upstream providers.

I'm not familiar with WAN routing... is it common to have a network that
can be connected to with one physical interface, that routes to many
different providers?

> It's no harder
> to load balance 2 way then 4 way, but a lot of network equipment makers
> would charge you twice as much because there are twice as many
> interfaces (or would charge you a significant amount more to have 4
> interfaces).

I could see that.. but I was under the impression that on any network
where you'd have routes to different providers that you want to load
balance, you'd need a different physical interface to each network that
the route was on.

> I'm guessing this is a pretty smart option assuming the aggregate
> traffic leaving you network is less then 100Mbit/s.  If it's more then
> 100Mbit/s, you can afford better equipment.

True :P


_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/