http://www.legato.com/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeffrey J. Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 11:00 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Redundant Send and Receive
>
>
> How about a URL for Legato since you are going to recommend it. :)
>
> jeff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Yuri
> Levenfeld
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 10:57 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Redundant Send and Receive
>
>
> I recommend Legato for it. Works very well and two servers
> are completely
> synchronized all the time although one Ipswitch license is enough to
> maintain it because Imail technically doesn't exist on the
> second server
> until first server dies.
>
> I tried in real time, second server became operational in 20
> seconds after
> the first one crashed, and it also inherited IP address from
> the failed
> server.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Daniel Donnelly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 11:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Redundant Send and Receive
>
>
> > Hmmmm, this means one needs at least 2 SQL and 2 File
> servers, so there is
> > redundancy (and cost!) in those.
> >
> > The best method (modest cost and highest uptime) I can
> envision would be
> to
> > have 2 duplicate machines and a switch over mechanism that
> puts the second
> > server online when the first fails. Just need to tools to
> perform the
> > switchover and the duplication of the files and data from
> the primary
> > machine to the secondary. This means only one 'backup'
> email machine and
> > some software to keep them synchronized. Seems that this
> would be a less
> > expensive and less hardware intensive technique than Rick's.
> >
> > Rick's method might be better for a system that already
> uses SQL and maybe
> a
> > larger system, so it does have a place in this world. But
> for a smaller
> > email system and less backup costs, I think my way may have some
> advantages.
> >
> > Using your existing S&F server, the total downtime would be
> the time it
> > takes you to construct a new mail computer, install
> software and data
> files.
> > I've done this in as little as 2 hours (1:50 was in copying
> the data!) for
> a
> > modest sized server. If you already have the computer built
> and it has
> > copies of your \imail folders and files, the time would be
> reduced to
> > something like 10 minutes or so ( changing the IP/hostname,
> installing
> IMail
> > and copying the registry). If your boss can live with that,
> then you need
> > just the hardware and daily backup of your user data to the
> backup email
> > machine. The second machine could actually serve 2 purposes!
> >
> > Daniel Donnelly
> > ________________________________________________________
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Rick Marei" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 5:38 PM
> > Subject: AW: [IMail Forum] Redundant Send and Receive
> >
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > to guarantee imail 100% uptime for a large number of
> users , here is how
> > to
> > > do it
> > >
> > > 2 imail servers authenticating against 1 clustered SQL
> Server and mails
> > > should be stored in 1 clustered file server to store
> emails, if this is
> > too
> > > much for you, just use RAID 5 or 10 for storing the
> mailboxes and also
> for
> > > SQL
> > >
> > > the mail files could be moved easily to a new box and the
> forwarding
> > > information are stored in plain text files in the
> mailboxes respectively
> > >
> > > for further details, please contact me
> > >
> > > Rick Marei
> > > i factory.at Internet Services GmbH
> > > Ferdinand Frey Weg 36
> > > A-1140 Wien
> > > Tel: +43 1 577 35 35
> > > Mobil: +43 676 95 666 11
> > >
> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Im Auftrag von Yuri
> Levenfeld
> > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. März 2001 14:21
> > > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Betreff: Re: [IMail Forum] Redundant Send and Receive
> > >
> > >
> > > clustering mail server
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Stephen LaBuda
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 1:08 PM
> > > Subject: [IMail Forum] Redundant Send and Receive
> > >
> > >
> > > Ok All, I am looking to implement some kind of
> redundancy for my mail
> > > service. Granted I already have a store and forward box but this
> doesn't
> > > seem to meet the needs of the "boss" .. He wants 0
> downtime or near zero
> > as
> > > possible for both sending and receiving mail for our service.
> > >
> > > Any suggestions on going about this?
> > >
> > > Thank You
> > >
> > > Stephen
> > >
> >
> >
> > Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> > to be removed from this list.
> >
> > An Archive of this list is available at:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
> >
>
>
> Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> to be removed from this list.
>
> An Archive of this list is available at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
>
>
>
> Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> to be removed from this list.
>
> An Archive of this list is available at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
>
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
An Archive of this list is available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
