Any my switch has multiple switch fabrics, multiple CPUs, multiple fan trays, and multiple power supplies :-)
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 10:30:19AM -0400, John Center wrote: > Hi Chuck, > > Our M120 has multiple REs, FEBs, FPCs, etc. just to avoid that scenario. > ;-) It is the most redundant piece of equipment we have. It's funny, > but it looks like it might have been better to have 2 separate boxes! > Then, we could have done VRRP, etc. > > Chuck Anderson wrote: > > The switch would have a single VLAN/subnet for both interfaces to be > > on. > > > > Yes, there would be a single point-of-failure for the switch, but the > > links themselves would still be redundant. Simple switches are > > usually less prone to failure than a complex router. I think most of > > the failures we have are human error or software-related (bugs), > > rather than actual hardware failures. If the switch had a very low > > churn of changes, this would be mitigated. > > > > You can think of IRB as being just an integrated switch inside the > > router--you still have only a single router/switch. So in your > > original scenario, there was a single point-of-failure of the router > > itself. > > > > On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 04:16:12PM -0500, John Center wrote: > >> To reply to my own message, the PIX standby interfaces have to be on the > >> same subnet as their corresponding primary interfaces. > >> > >> John Center wrote: > >>> Hi Chuck, > >>> > >>> The only problem with using a switch is it's a single point of failure. > >>> I'm not sure how failover would work with each PIX on separate routed > >>> subnet. I'm looking into this now. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
