On 3/15/2012 5:51 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2012-03-01 8:38 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> Get yourself a qualified network architect. Pay for a full network
>> traffic analysis. He'll attach sniffers at multiple points in your
>> network to gather traffic/error/etc data. Then you'll discuss
On 2012-03-01 8:38 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Get yourself a qualified network architect. Pay for a full network
traffic analysis. He'll attach sniffers at multiple points in your
network to gather traffic/error/etc data. Then you'll discuss the new
office, which employees/types with move there
On 3/3/2012 2:20 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> Thanks very much for taking the time for your detailed reply, Stan, but
> I'll need more time to study it...
>
> On 2012-03-02 4:17 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
>> My gut instinct, based on experience and the match, is that a single GbE
>> inter site MA
So, the only extra expenses involved will be relatively minor hardware
expenses (multi-port Gb NICs), and some consulting services for making
sure I implement the VM environment (including the routing) correctly.
Take into account costs of administering a more complex environment too.
--
poz
Thanks very much for taking the time for your detailed reply, Stan, but
I'll need more time to study it...
On 2012-03-02 4:17 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
My gut instinct, based on experience and the match, is that a single GbE
inter site MAN link will be plenty, without the need to duplicate ser
On 3/1/2012 5:43 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> Obviously, I don't have the experience or expertise to answer these
> questions myself (never analyzed IMAP traffic to have an idea of the
> bandwidth each user uses, and probably wouldn't trust my efforts if I
> made the attempt). Hopefully, there are
On 3/1/2012 5:43 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2012-02-29 9:15 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> Q: How many concurrent IMAP clients could you serve with this setup
>> before hitting a bottleneck at any point in the architecture?
>
> No idea how to calculate it...
The correct answer is approxim
On 2012-02-29 9:15 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Q: How many concurrent IMAP clients could you serve with this setup
before hitting a bottleneck at any point in the architecture?
No idea how to calculate it...
What is the first bottleneck you'd run into?
Unless this is a trick question, t
On 2/27/2012 10:54 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> These two locations will be connected via a private Gb ethernet
> connection, and each location will have its own internet connection (I
> think - still waiting on some numbers to present to the owner to see
> what he wants to do in that regard, but t
On 27.2.2012, at 18.54, Charles Marcus wrote:
> I recall that 'dsync based replication' is actually on the map for 2.1, but,
> since apparently dsync can't do this now, Timo, do you have even a rough idea
> how much work this would be to get it working for only 2 locations (assuming
> it *may*
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 02:51:54PM -0600, l...@airstreamcomm.net wrote:
>
> You could also look at GPFS
> (http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/software/gpfs/), which is not open source
> but it's apparently rock solid and I believe supports multisite clustering.
GPFS supports different modes of cluster
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 13:38:39 -0500, Charles Marcus
wrote:
> On 2012-02-27 1:34 PM, Sven Hartge wrote:
>> Charles Marcus wrote:
>>> Each location is an entire floor of a 6 story building. The remote
>>> location has the capacity for about 60 users, the new location about
>>> 100. We only allow IM
On 27.02.2012 19:21, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2012-02-27 12:59 PM, Adam Szpakowski wrote:
I do have a basic question... How many users will be in this new,
remote location? Will the traffic be so vast, that 1GbE link will not
be enough, or are you using two servers for reliability?
Yeah, I gu
On 2012-02-27 1:34 PM, Sven Hartge wrote:
Charles Marcus wrote:
Each location is an entire floor of a 6 story building. The remote
location has the capacity for about 60 users, the new location about
100. We only allow IMAP access to email, so if everyone is using email
at the same time, that
Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2012-02-27 12:59 PM, Adam Szpakowski wrote:
>> I do have a basic question... How many users will be in this new,
>> remote location? Will the traffic be so vast, that 1GbE link will not
>> be enough, or are you using two servers for reliability?
> Yeah, I guess I shou
On 2012-02-27 1:12 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
If you have some control over client configuration, use "offline
IMAP," where clients maintain a local copy of what's on the server.
(That's a good idea anyway, distributed backups of mail which
possibly is important.)
Most of these users have many multi
On 2012-02-27 12:59 PM, Adam Szpakowski wrote:
I do have a basic question... How many users will be in this new,
remote location? Will the traffic be so vast, that 1GbE link will not
be enough, or are you using two servers for reliability?
Yeah, I guess I should have mentioned this...
Each lo
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 06:59:14PM +0100, Adam Szpakowski wrote:
> On 27.02.2012 17:54, Charles Marcus wrote:
> >These two locations will be connected via a private Gb ethernet
> >connection, and each location will have its own internet
> >connection (I think - still waiting on some numbers to pr
On 27.02.2012 17:54, Charles Marcus wrote:
These two locations will be connected via a private Gb ethernet
connection, and each location will have its own internet connection (I
think - still waiting on some numbers to present to the owner to see
what he wants to do in that regard, but that wil
19 matches
Mail list logo
