On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Justin M. Streiner <streiner@cluebyfour.org
wrote:
If you want to use servers as routers, that's your choice. I think what most people in the thread have been saying is not to use one server (or even a pair of servers) for everything. It's one thing if server XYZ goes down and some web services are offline. It's another thing entirely if that same server goes down and your entire business is offline.
You need at least two servers. Much of the functional separation can be achieved by using virtualisation: Two virtual servers per function, but only two physical servers. It is a lot cheaper to just get two beefy servers than to invest in expensive 10G routers. Later on it is easy to move the VMs to more servers if needed. The exception might be any function that moves packets. It is hard to get the necessary performance from dedicated hardware. Trying to do it from a VM will not help. In that case I would dedicate two physical machines to the purpose. However I am actually trying to avoid having the server move packets - I want to use an OpenFlow switch to do the brunt work. Running a BGP daemon on a VM to remote control an OpenFlow switch should not be a problem. Regards, Baldur