Phillip, I disagree....
There are many examples of network infrastructure that require a server to
have more than a single NIC. I've outlined just a few examples below.
a) A server requiring very high bandwidth to a network, or a highly
available connection to a network, could benefit from a teamed network
set-up. This usually involves 2 or more NIC's being connected in parallel to
the same network switch. Software on the server (or a combination of
software and hardware) works in tandem with the teamed ports on the switch
to 'group' the NICs together as so they act as one. This can be either
bandwidth improvements to the switch, or for high availability reasons
should one of the NIC's or switch ports fail. A similar configuration is
sometimes used to connect switches together on large heavily used backbones
or data centres - in this case the correct term is network trunking.
b) A server that provides access to a database, or the next tier of a
database application may benefit from two NICs. One NIC may be connected to
the private secured data network, while the second NIC may be connected to a
public/front facing network. In this kind of scenario, the server could
likely be one of a group of clustered or load balanced servers providing the
same service across the same 2 networks. This kind of set-up would be
inherently secure as the data network could be completely separated from any
other traffic. It would be inherently fault tolerant as should any one
server fail, other servers in the cluster would continue to service
requests. It would also be inherently highly available as any server could
be removed to perform maintenance/upgrade without effecting the overall
availability of the database application.
At the company I work for, we have a large data centre set-up not unlike the
second example above. The main difference being that our front facing
application servers each have 3 NIC's in them as we have 2 private data
networks as well as the public network.
Paul.
Phillip Windell wrote:
Multi-nic computers are fine if you are *specifically* building them to be a
Router, a Firewall (NAT Device), or a Proxy,...otherwise they should only
have one Nic.
"Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Yes. It will work. But you can also drive you car by removing the
> windshield, sitting on the roof and turning the sterring wheel with your
> feet and pushing the pedals with a stick. So, yes it will work,..but it
> is
> not the best way to go about it.
>
> Networks should exist separately from the computers that run on them and
> be
> able to "stand on thier own". So you use the cables, switches, hubs, and
> routers to build the network. You place routers (not computers) between
> the
> network segments. When you power them all up the network "runs",...then
> you
> plug the computers into the network and they "live" on the already
> existing
> network. You will be "miles ahead" and have a lot less grief if you
> follow
> this perspective.
>
> Multi-nic computers are fine if you are *specifically* building them to be
> a
> Router, a Firewall (NAT Device), or a Proxy,...otherwise they should only
> have one Nic.
>
> --
>
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
>
> "Benjamin" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:1F1C7C2D-0D1E-4E00-8620-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Is Win2003 able to support 3 network card? What should i look out for
> piror
>> to the installation of the 3rd NIC. Currently my server is running 2
> network
>> environment and the 3rd one is to connect to my 3rd network environment
> for
>> some FTP stuff. Will it work?
>>
>> thanks.
>
>
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
