was fairly simple and we have had no issues. We chose to install a new
device, rather than utilizing our firewalls, since we have two Cisco
ASAs for redundancy. Connecting both of our WAN connections to each ASA
would not have been an easy take to accomplish.
=20
Stuart
=20
=20
=20
Stuart Posin
Director of Academic and Administrative Technology
Marlborough School
250 South Rossmore Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90004
Tel: (323) 964-8408
Web: www.marlboroughschool.org ( http://www.marlboroughschool.org/ )
=20
"A national leader in secondary education, Marlborough School has been
preparing young women for leadership and contribution since 1889."
>>>=20
From: "Dickenson, Steven" <sdickenson@keyschool.org>
To:<ISED-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
Date: 3/12/2010 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: Fatpipe et al.
Most modern firewalls do this already, although there are some
limitations with route selection. We use our FortiGate 110C to balance
two bonded T's and a Comcast connection, although we default almost all
outbound traffic to the Comcast connection since the speeds between the
two pipes are so asymmetric. I can route traffic based on source,
destination, protocol, etc, and can also do bandwidth based routing with
spillover. And of course, if our pipes were more matched in terms of
bandwidth, I could do a simple round-robin. All of the above can do
automatic failover with ping targets.
Our old SonicWall 3060 Pro did this, as do many Cisco and other
products, so you may want to see if your existing firewall will support
this for you. I don't think they can match the specialty features of
FatPipe, but can you see a real benefit using those features for the
price you pay?
S
---
Steven Dickenson <sdickenson@keyschool.org>
Computer Network Manager
The Key School, Annapolis Maryland
-----Original Message-----
From: A forum for independent school educators
[mailto:ISED-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Steve Taffee
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 6:01 PM
To: ISED-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU=20
Subject: Fatpipe et al.
We are considering adding a secondary ISP for automatic failover and
load
balancing for our internet connection next year. With more and more
going on
in the cloud, having reliable, fast bandwidth is mission critical.
Specifically, we are considering moving up from our current ATT Opteman
10MB
circuit to an ATT 20 MPS circuit, burstable speeds up to 50 MPS. We
would
supplement that with a Comcast circuit of some sort.
We'd like to be able to add load balancing to use both circuit
concurrently
as needed, intelligently route traffic based on packets, time of day,
etc.
Automatic failover, of course.
One company that does this is Fatpipe, which (based on their demo)
seems to
look like both a solid product and very easy to configure compared to
something from Cisco.
So may questions are:
1. If you are using Fatpipe, what has been your experience? or,
2. If you are using a similar product, what is it and how is it working
for
you?
Tks!
-----
Steve Taffee staffee@castilleja.org=20
Director of Technology 650.924.1040 (Google Voice)
Castilleja School 650.470.7725 (office)
1310 Bryant Street 415.613.6684 (mobile)
Palo Alto, CA 94301 www.castilleja.org |
taffee.edublogs.org
Women Learning, Women Leading
=E2=99=BA Please consider the environment and print only when necessary. =
=E2=99=BA
[ For info on ISED-L see
https://www.gds.org/podium/default.aspx?t=3D128874 ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons,
attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
[ For info on ISED-L see https://www.gds.org/podium/default.aspx?t=3D128874 ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
