On some machine for which i can edvice but do not have final decision there sare some non-exixtent services. The administrator choose to drop packets sent to these ports. This led some legitimate users to long timeout delay before automatically switch to a different [active] service on another port. I suggest to reject packet rather than dropping, so it would cause the remote client to avoid waiting and immediately switch to the opther port. What could be the advantage/disadvantage of this solution ? (I know thatb this could give sono port-scanners an advantage. but is this worth the anooyance to legitimate users ?)
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004, Rishi wrote: > > - if you cannot be down for more than 5 minutes... you should have 2 > > complete independent systems ( properly configured and tested for > > high-availability ... ) which has NOTHING to do with raid or mirror'ing > > - if you cannot afford the extra hardware and extra time > > to configure, than that extra hw costs should be > > realistically weighed agaist how much $$$ is lost due to > > the machine failure > > Hi Alvin, > > Thanks for the speedy response. This high-availability thing sounds > interesting. Can you point me to some documentation on the NET that > will help me achive this? I think it's worth investing the $$$ for > this. I will try it on two spare computers at the office. > > Regards > > -- > Rishi > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
