RES: RE: M$ NLB vs. RainWall for ISA

From: "Tiago de Aviz" <Tiago@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "[ISAserver.org Discussion List]" <isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 17:49:46 -0300
You also must upgrade the CAL's if you upgrade to Windows Advanced
Server, am i wrong?

 

Tiago de Aviz

-----------------------

tiago@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

www.softsell.com.br

-----------------------

 

-----Mensagem original-----
De: Thomas W Shinder [mailto:tshinder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Enviada em: sexta-feira, 21 de fevereiro de 2003 17:19
Para: [ISAserver.org Discussion List]
Assunto: [isalist] RE: M$ NLB vs. RainWall for ISA

 

http://www.ISAserver.org

Hi Paul,

 

Thanks! I appreciate your kind words about my presentation :-)

 

There are several advantages that RainWall has over the Win2k NLB:

 

1. The major one is symmetric routing. If you want to have inbound and
outbound fault tolerance, NLB can't fill the bill. You have to choose
one or the other.

 

2. While you can use HTTPMon, RainWall is aware of all ISA Server
services, and can be make aware of other Win2k network and system
services. RainWall can also be made aware of other network and
non-network services.

 

3. VPN gateways can be a nightmare with NLB. They work great with
RainWall

 

4. From the information I have, it costs much less to run RainWall than
to upgrade to Win2k Advanced Server.

 

There's are lot more cool stuff in RainWall than I had time to go over.
Look for my articles on RainWall at www.isaserver.org in the next few
weeks.

 

Thanks!

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Berg [mailto:frogman1370@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 2:05 PM
To: [ISAserver.org Discussion List]
Subject: [isalist] M$ NLB vs. RainWall for ISA

http://www.ISAserver.org 

Tom,

I was very impressed with the presentation that you gave yesterday with
the Rainwall product.  The only thing that really caught my eye in the
difference of Microsoft's Load Balancing was that it was unable to fault
tolerent if an ISA service was to fail (without configuring HTTPmon).
My question is:  Does the cost of RainWall justify the cost of having to
upgrade a server to Windows 2000 Advance in order to do Network Load
Balancing.  

 

Exactly what is the cost in licensing Rainwall, by the way?

 

Paul

 


  _____  


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! <http://rd.yahoo.com/finance/mailtagline/*http:/taxes.yahoo.com/>
Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more
------------------------------------------------------ List Archives:
http://www.webelists.com/cgi/lyris.pl?enter=isalist ISA Server
Newsletter: http://www.isaserver.org/pages/newsletter.asp ISA Server
FAQ: http://www.isaserver.org/pages/larticle.asp?type=FAQ
------------------------------------------------------ Exchange Server
Resource Site: http://www.msexchange.org/ Windows Security Resource
Site: http://www.windowsecurity.com/ Windows 2000/NT Fax Solutions:
http://www.ntfaxfaq.com
------------------------------------------------------ You are currently
subscribed to this ISAserver.org Discussion List as:
tshinder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send a blank email to
$subst('Email.Unsub')

------------------------------------------------------
List Archives: http://www.webelists.com/cgi/lyris.pl?enter=isalist
ISA Server Newsletter: http://www.isaserver.org/pages/newsletter.asp
ISA Server FAQ: http://www.isaserver.org/pages/larticle.asp?type=FAQ
------------------------------------------------------
Exchange Server Resource Site: http://www.msexchange.org/
Windows Security Resource Site: http://www.windowsecurity.com/
Windows 2000/NT Fax Solutions: http://www.ntfaxfaq.com
------------------------------------------------------
You are currently subscribed to this ISAserver.org Discussion List as:
tiago@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
$subst('Email.Unsub')
RES: RE: M$ NLB vs. RainWall for ISA

Other related posts:
