NWC | Letters | Letters | | February 6, 2003

NEWS BLOGS FORUMS NEWSLETTERS RESEARCH EVENTS DIGITAL LIBRARY CAREERS

IMMERSE YOURSELF:

Storage & Servers

February 6, 2003

Issue TOC

Print full article

Download as PDF

E-Mail this URL

Discuss this article

Flame the author

Instead of buying the best technology, we're spending too much time taking bets on the stability of our IT vendors. ~ Russell Cohen

NWC Inc. Product Choices
Do you filter incoming e-mail on the NWC Inc. Microsoft Exchange server ("A Start-Up is Born," Dec. 1, 2002)? Many businesses and organizations need to filter out spam and incoming virus attachments.

Also, what advantages are there to running Exchange versus Netscape for e-mail clients? Do any of your engineering or development staff members use Linux desktops?

Don Peasley
Network Administrator; L-3 Communications, Link Simulation & Training
dmpeasley@link.com

Lori MacVittie replies: We do not have filtering on our NWC Inc. Exchange server. However, we are working on a corporatewide virus-scanning solution for the fictional company.

On the desktop front, our plan calls for five developers using Microsoft Visual Studio .Net and five developers using IBM WebSphere Studio. Of course, we don't really have those developers (it's just me). I use Windows for .Net development and lately have been using WebSphere Studio on Linux. That's problematic in an Exchange environment but only because we have not purchased Ximian's Exchange connector for Ximian Evolution, which is my primary e-mail client on Linux. In a mixed environment, using a standards-oriented mail server would certainly be better, but there are solutions that let other mail clients take advantage of Exchange.

The biggest benefit to using Exchange--and the main reason we chose it for NWC Inc.--is staff experience administering an Exchange environment. We also were swayed by Exchange's ease of integration with Microsoft's Active Directory Services, our directory solution.

Due Diligence Overkill
I fully agree with Rob Preston's views in "Buy the Best Mousetrap" (Dec. 1, 2002) but would add that his recommendations apply not only to start-ups, but also to major players, such as Novell.

I understand the obsession with due diligence when it comes to choosing business-critical systems, but not when it comes to selecting minor applications, commodities and services. Instead of buying the best technology, we're spending too much time taking bets on the financial stability of our IT vendors. These bets tend to become self-fulfilling prophecies once enough customers hold back because a vendor doesn't have an ironclad sales forecast. We should be asking ourselves, "What's the worst that can happen?" Generally, the worst-case scenario is that we'll use the product until the end of its life span, then replace it.

Russell Cohen
Team Leader; LSOA Messaging Team LAN Services, Standard Bank Group
rlcohen@sbic.co.za

Network Mgmt No-Shows
I read Bruce Boardman's "The End All of Network Performance Management" (Dec. 1, 2002) and found it highly informative. However, I wondered why Boardman didn't include Hewlett-Packard's OpenView and Micromuse's Netcool in his tests.

Also, has Network Computing found a product that tracks the performance of disparate wireless networks other than the proprietary software used to administer the nodes? I'm interested in tracking node quality as well as transfer quality between networks.

Steve Melanson
President and COO; Northeast Data Vault
smelanson@nedatavault.com

Bruce Boardman replies: Hewlett-Packard and Micromuse had products that met our criteria for the review, but HP declined to participate because our focus wasn't on the company's strongest area, and Micromuse was too busy reorganizing. Both companies' products focus more on monitoring than on long-term baselines. I know of only one network-management vendor--WildPackets--that claims special capabilities in this area.

Dave Molta adds: Most wireless networks are IP-based, so generally we use standard tools, such as NetIQ's Chariot, to measure throughput. However, sometimes we turn to Web-based benchmark tools, such as those available at www.bandwidthplace.com. There's no silver bullet, as far as I'm aware.

Embedded NICs Are No Bargain
I was really interested a few months back in the type of product Mike Fratto covers in "3Com Embeds Firewall in PC NICs" (Nov. 15, 2002) until I found that the software to enable the NIC's advanced features is a separate product and costs more than the NIC.

Carl J. Warner
Independent
VFPRocks@bellsouth.net

Mike Fratto responds: The product would be more valuable if the firewall were stateful rather than just for packet filtering. Perhaps that will be a future feature.

Correction
In our "High on Fibre" review (Dec. 1, 2002) we tested the Brocade SilkWorm 3800, not the SilkWorm 3802. Also, contrary to what we stated in the article, the product's memory buffers are embedded in the ASIC.

Tell us how you really feel. Write to us at editor@nwc.com. Include your name, title, company name, e-mail address and phone number. All correspondence becomes the property of Network Computing.