Bart Nikota wrote: <snip> > > Thanks for the reply Nick, > > What you have said is really the dangers that I've been worried about, and > thought it unwise to expose my network that way. > > So for another dumb question --- > > How does one back-up a web server on the DMZ to a Tape library on the > PRO side? Or is it just best to take the WebServer down at a low usage > time (1:00am -- ouch!) and plug it in to the local net? Any other thoughts out > there?
Quick answer: You don't. Or, at least, I wouldn't. Don't know what is on your web server or how you use it, but... 1) Tape drive on web server 2) For a small site, tar..er..zip up the content, ftp/scp/CD-R/whatever it off-machine. 3) For some sites, the backing up the machine on which the web site is generated may be sufficient. 4) If you have so much content that these aren't sufficient strategy, you can probably afford another tape changer/library. Anyway you go, tying your web server into your existing backup system mandates tying it into your network far more than you want an internet exposed box, I think. $1500 gets the box its own backup drive, tapes, and software (and leaves a lot to spare, I think), assuming you can get by with a 4-6G backup media (that's a lot of web server, though, again, I don't know your needs or app). I'm having extreme difficulty imagining the benefit of your tape library outweighing the costs of downtime to "relocate" the server to your internal network, or the risk of putting your server on the inside network. Remember, your tape library is a means to an goal (backups), not the goal itself. Nick. -- http://www.holland-consulting.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to the digest version first unsubscribe, then e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
