Discussion:
Security benefits of spliting services between two ISP providers
(too old to reply)
Rossen S. Naydenov
2005-05-17 08:05:46 UTC
Permalink
Hi group,

What will be the security benefit of splitting services between two ISP
providers?
By splitting services I mean have one ISP serve only web based business
services and other ISP serve the email and traffic generated by internal
web browsing (or something similar).
Right now everything goes through one ISP and second ISP connection is
kept as a backup.

Thanks.



Disclaimer:

This communication is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication by mistake, please notify us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your system.
Bulgarian Post Bank is not responsible for, nor endorses, any opinion, recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement or any information contained in this communication.
Bulgarian Post Bank cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a public network. If you suspect that the message may have been intercepted or amended, please call the sender.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Reece Mills
2005-05-17 08:20:15 UTC
Permalink
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Only part of what you need will be affected if one of your ISPs
fail.... Hope it is not the web based business services provider...
Hope it
is not the email provider....

Ok... What will be the security benefit of splitting services between
two ISP providers as you described?

Nothing.

Reece


Rossen S. Naydenov wrote:

|Hi group,
|
|What will be the security benefit of splitting services between two ISP
|providers?
|By splitting services I mean have one ISP serve only web based business
|services and other ISP serve the email and traffic generated by internal
|web browsing (or something similar).
|Right now everything goes through one ISP and second ISP connection is
|kept as a backup.
|
|Thanks.
|
|
|
|Disclaimer:
|
|This communication is confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this communication by mistake, please notify us immediately
by responding to this email and then delete it from your system.
|Bulgarian Post Bank is not responsible for, nor endorses, any
opinion, recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement
or any information contained in this communication.
|Bulgarian Post Bank cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy
or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a
public network. If you suspect that the message may have been
intercepted or amended, please call the sender.
|_______________________________________________
|Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
|Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
|Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFCiak/yz6oy+l1oOERAnnhAJ483QBQ6EOmNv56TEDqiW8ZuhF5jgCggr1X
CIiHtXJ+MtjQDkSJBESHnyY=
=5Z6y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Frank Laszlo
2005-05-17 13:04:24 UTC
Permalink
Not exactly. If one ISP fails, the other could be used as a backup
system for the services
that are on the "failed" isp. This could be done with a transparent
proxy or something of the sort.

Regards,
Frank
Post by Reece Mills
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Only part of what you need will be affected if one of your ISPs
fail.... Hope it is not the web based business services provider...
Hope it
is not the email provider....
Ok... What will be the security benefit of splitting services between
two ISP providers as you described?
Nothing.
Reece
|Hi group,
|
|What will be the security benefit of splitting services between two ISP
|providers?
|By splitting services I mean have one ISP serve only web based business
|services and other ISP serve the email and traffic generated by internal
|web browsing (or something similar).
|Right now everything goes through one ISP and second ISP connection is
|kept as a backup.
|
|Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|This communication is confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this communication by mistake, please notify us immediately
by responding to this email and then delete it from your system.
|Bulgarian Post Bank is not responsible for, nor endorses, any
opinion, recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement
or any information contained in this communication.
|Bulgarian Post Bank cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy
or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a
public network. If you suspect that the message may have been
intercepted or amended, please call the sender.
|_______________________________________________
|Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
|Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
|Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFCiak/yz6oy+l1oOERAnnhAJ483QBQ6EOmNv56TEDqiW8ZuhF5jgCggr1X
CIiHtXJ+MtjQDkSJBESHnyY=
=5Z6y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Dave Hawkins
2005-05-17 16:45:57 UTC
Permalink
In the case of DDoS, if your web services are targeted, your email
systems would still have plenty of bandwidth (splitting services in that
way). Segmenting services like this would pose no real threat from a
security standpoint, and in my opinion, only allows you to more fully
utilize both lines that you're already paying for. In the case of
actual ISP failures, it is quite easy to use something like the Radware
LinkProof or WSD to handle complete fail-over to other network
providers. It can be (and is) easily done with a lot of our clients who
require high-availability for disasters, but also to prevent someone
from saturating a particular ISP link. Combine this with a
multi-segment IPS and you can minimize your risks greatly.
Don't misinterpret this as a plug for our products, but Radware has been
in the high-availability and security space for a while now, and we get
these kinds of questions all the time.

Cheers,
-Dave Hawkins
Security Engineer
Radware
http://www.radware.com


-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-***@lists.grok.org.uk
[mailto:full-disclosure-***@lists.grok.org.uk] On Behalf Of Frank
Laszlo
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 8:04 AM
To: Reece Mills
Cc: full-***@lists.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Security benefits of spliting services
between two ISP providers

Not exactly. If one ISP fails, the other could be used as a backup
system for the services that are on the "failed" isp. This could be done
with a transparent proxy or something of the sort.

Regards,
Frank
Post by Reece Mills
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Only part of what you need will be affected if one of your ISPs
fail.... Hope it is not the web based business services provider...
Hope it
is not the email provider....
Ok... What will be the security benefit of splitting services between
two ISP providers as you described?
Nothing.
Reece
|Hi group,
|
|What will be the security benefit of splitting services between two
|ISP providers?
|By splitting services I mean have one ISP serve only web based
|business services and other ISP serve the email and traffic generated
|by internal web browsing (or something similar).
|Right now everything goes through one ISP and second ISP connection
|is kept as a backup.
|
|Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|This communication is confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this communication by mistake, please notify us immediately
by responding to this email and then delete it from your system.
|Bulgarian Post Bank is not responsible for, nor endorses, any
opinion, recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement
or any information contained in this communication.
|Bulgarian Post Bank cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy
or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a
public network. If you suspect that the message may have been
intercepted or amended, please call the sender.
|_______________________________________________
|Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
|Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
|Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFCiak/yz6oy+l1oOERAnnhAJ483QBQ6EOmNv56TEDqiW8ZuhF5jgCggr1X
CIiHtXJ+MtjQDkSJBESHnyY=
=5Z6y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Reece Mills
2005-05-17 17:38:06 UTC
Permalink
Dave,
You and Frank have both made excellent points. Utilization of bandwidth
and risk reduction through splitting services across providers. I guess
I had taken a particularly narrow view in my initial response.

Splitting of services across different ISP's is not a bad idea. My note
vaguely addressed that. If a cost to benefit evaluation supports an
entity utilizing two separate ISP's. My question would be, Is this
extra expenditure necessary for the organization? An SLA with one ISP
might be enough to accomplish a logical space split for a fraction of
the costs of buying two SLA's from two providers. Now, if you are in an
area that is prone to natural and man made disasters (fires, flooding,
earthquakes and bombings) and since you are a global entity, then by all
means split services as described. However, if that is the case then
full redundancy would be my goal.

My apologies for the terse initial response. Sleep is a good thing and
I will try to get more of it.

Reece
Post by Dave Hawkins
In the case of DDoS, if your web services are targeted, your email
systems would still have plenty of bandwidth (splitting services in that
way). Segmenting services like this would pose no real threat from a
security standpoint, and in my opinion, only allows you to more fully
utilize both lines that you're already paying for. In the case of
actual ISP failures, it is quite easy to use something like the Radware
LinkProof or WSD to handle complete fail-over to other network
providers. It can be (and is) easily done with a lot of our clients who
require high-availability for disasters, but also to prevent someone
from saturating a particular ISP link. Combine this with a
multi-segment IPS and you can minimize your risks greatly.
Don't misinterpret this as a plug for our products, but Radware has been
in the high-availability and security space for a while now, and we get
these kinds of questions all the time.
Cheers,
-Dave Hawkins
Security Engineer
Radware
http://www.radware.com
-----Original Message-----
Laszlo
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 8:04 AM
To: Reece Mills
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Security benefits of spliting services
between two ISP providers
Not exactly. If one ISP fails, the other could be used as a backup
system for the services that are on the "failed" isp. This could be done
with a transparent proxy or something of the sort.
Regards,
Frank
Only part of what you need will be affected if one of your ISPs
fail.... Hope it is not the web based business services provider...
Hope it
is not the email provider....
Ok... What will be the security benefit of splitting services between
two ISP providers as you described?
Nothing.
Reece
|Hi group,
|
|What will be the security benefit of splitting services between two
|ISP providers?
|By splitting services I mean have one ISP serve only web based
|business services and other ISP serve the email and traffic generated
|by internal web browsing (or something similar).
|Right now everything goes through one ISP and second ISP connection
|is kept as a backup.
|
|Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|This communication is confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this communication by mistake, please notify us immediately
by responding to this email and then delete it from your system.
|Bulgarian Post Bank is not responsible for, nor endorses, any
opinion, recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement
or any information contained in this communication.
|Bulgarian Post Bank cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy
or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a
public network. If you suspect that the message may have been
intercepted or amended, please call the sender.
|_______________________________________________
|Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
|Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
|Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
|
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Post by Dave Hawkins
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Rossen S. Naydenov
2005-05-18 07:00:13 UTC
Permalink
I see what you mean guys.

But still I think there are some other things to consider.
Having two online ISP connections doubles the possibility of having bad
happening to you (attacks, floods, etc.), right?

On the other hand when speaking about bandwidth utilization things are
different. Let's see the two options:
First option - One ISP online and one offline
- Say we have 3Mbps online and that's it - both services will
share that bandwidth.
Second option - Two ISP online
- Say 2Mbps for business purposes on first ISP and 1Mbps for
other purposes on the second ISP.

But when speaking for total bandwidth I see that in the second option
total bandwidth is 2Mbps, while in first total is 3Mbps. What about
that?

In case of failure of one ISP (second option) we will have 2/3 or even
1/3 of the bandwidth we need... Having two ISP online with 3Mbps
available bandwidth is not good, because we will not be able to utilize
it.

Rossen

-----Original Message-----
From: Reece Mills [mailto:***@charter.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 8:38 PM
To: Dave Hawkins; ***@tvog.net; Rossen S. Naydenov
Cc: full-***@lists.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Security benefits of spliting services
between two ISP providers

Dave,
You and Frank have both made excellent points. Utilization of bandwidth
and risk reduction through splitting services across providers. I guess

I had taken a particularly narrow view in my initial response.

Splitting of services across different ISP's is not a bad idea. My note

vaguely addressed that. If a cost to benefit evaluation supports an
entity utilizing two separate ISP's. My question would be, Is this
extra expenditure necessary for the organization? An SLA with one ISP
might be enough to accomplish a logical space split for a fraction of
the costs of buying two SLA's from two providers. Now, if you are in an

area that is prone to natural and man made disasters (fires, flooding,
earthquakes and bombings) and since you are a global entity, then by all

means split services as described. However, if that is the case then
full redundancy would be my goal.

My apologies for the terse initial response. Sleep is a good thing and
I will try to get more of it.

Reece
Post by Dave Hawkins
In the case of DDoS, if your web services are targeted, your email
systems would still have plenty of bandwidth (splitting services in
that
Post by Dave Hawkins
way). Segmenting services like this would pose no real threat from a
security standpoint, and in my opinion, only allows you to more fully
utilize both lines that you're already paying for. In the case of
actual ISP failures, it is quite easy to use something like the Radware
LinkProof or WSD to handle complete fail-over to other network
providers. It can be (and is) easily done with a lot of our clients who
require high-availability for disasters, but also to prevent someone
from saturating a particular ISP link. Combine this with a
multi-segment IPS and you can minimize your risks greatly.
Don't misinterpret this as a plug for our products, but Radware has
been
Post by Dave Hawkins
in the high-availability and security space for a while now, and we get
these kinds of questions all the time.
Cheers,
-Dave Hawkins
Security Engineer
Radware
http://www.radware.com
-----Original Message-----
Laszlo
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 8:04 AM
To: Reece Mills
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Security benefits of spliting services
between two ISP providers
Not exactly. If one ISP fails, the other could be used as a backup
system for the services that are on the "failed" isp. This could be
done
Post by Dave Hawkins
with a transparent proxy or something of the sort.
Regards,
Frank
Only part of what you need will be affected if one of your ISPs
fail.... Hope it is not the web based business services provider...
Hope it
is not the email provider....
Ok... What will be the security benefit of splitting services between
two ISP providers as you described?
Nothing.
Reece
|Hi group,
|
|What will be the security benefit of splitting services between two
|ISP providers?
|By splitting services I mean have one ISP serve only web based
|business services and other ISP serve the email and traffic generated
|by internal web browsing (or something similar).
|Right now everything goes through one ISP and second ISP connection
|is kept as a backup.
|
|Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|This communication is confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this communication by mistake, please notify us immediately
by responding to this email and then delete it from your system.
|Bulgarian Post Bank is not responsible for, nor endorses, any
opinion, recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement
or any information contained in this communication.
|Bulgarian Post Bank cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy
or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a
public network. If you suspect that the message may have been
intercepted or amended, please call the sender.
|_______________________________________________
|Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
|Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
|Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
|
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Post by Dave Hawkins
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Disclaimer:

This communication is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication by mistake, please notify us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your system.
Bulgarian Post Bank is not responsible for, nor endorses, any opinion, recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement or any information contained in this communication.
Bulgarian Post Bank cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a public network. If you suspect that the message may have been intercepted or amended, please call the sender.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Frank Laszlo
2005-05-18 13:14:56 UTC
Permalink
You never really want to utilize 100% of your bandwidth, you should
always have some "extra" bandwidth "just in case." Sure, there are costs
involved, but as a business, surely one could make the decision on
whether or not to push it as an expense, or take the risk of only having
1 connection. I personally wouldnt split the services between the two
ISPs, I would simple have another connection for those "just in case"
situations. If a business relies heavily on internet, you shouldnt be
worried about a few extra bucks for a redundent connection. Just my 2 cents.

Regards,
Frank
Post by Rossen S. Naydenov
I see what you mean guys.
But still I think there are some other things to consider.
Having two online ISP connections doubles the possibility of having bad
happening to you (attacks, floods, etc.), right?
On the other hand when speaking about bandwidth utilization things are
First option - One ISP online and one offline
- Say we have 3Mbps online and that's it - both services will
share that bandwidth.
Second option - Two ISP online
- Say 2Mbps for business purposes on first ISP and 1Mbps for
other purposes on the second ISP.
But when speaking for total bandwidth I see that in the second option
total bandwidth is 2Mbps, while in first total is 3Mbps. What about
that?
In case of failure of one ISP (second option) we will have 2/3 or even
1/3 of the bandwidth we need... Having two ISP online with 3Mbps
available bandwidth is not good, because we will not be able to utilize
it.
Rossen
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Security benefits of spliting services
between two ISP providers
Dave,
You and Frank have both made excellent points. Utilization of bandwidth
and risk reduction through splitting services across providers. I guess
I had taken a particularly narrow view in my initial response.
Splitting of services across different ISP's is not a bad idea. My note
vaguely addressed that. If a cost to benefit evaluation supports an
entity utilizing two separate ISP's. My question would be, Is this
extra expenditure necessary for the organization? An SLA with one ISP
might be enough to accomplish a logical space split for a fraction of
the costs of buying two SLA's from two providers. Now, if you are in an
area that is prone to natural and man made disasters (fires, flooding,
earthquakes and bombings) and since you are a global entity, then by all
means split services as described. However, if that is the case then
full redundancy would be my goal.
My apologies for the terse initial response. Sleep is a good thing and
I will try to get more of it.
Reece
Post by Dave Hawkins
In the case of DDoS, if your web services are targeted, your email
systems would still have plenty of bandwidth (splitting services in
that
Post by Dave Hawkins
way). Segmenting services like this would pose no real threat from a
security standpoint, and in my opinion, only allows you to more fully
utilize both lines that you're already paying for. In the case of
actual ISP failures, it is quite easy to use something like the Radware
LinkProof or WSD to handle complete fail-over to other network
providers. It can be (and is) easily done with a lot of our clients who
require high-availability for disasters, but also to prevent someone
from saturating a particular ISP link. Combine this with a
multi-segment IPS and you can minimize your risks greatly.
Don't misinterpret this as a plug for our products, but Radware has
been
Post by Dave Hawkins
in the high-availability and security space for a while now, and we get
these kinds of questions all the time.
Cheers,
-Dave Hawkins
Security Engineer
Radware
http://www.radware.com
-----Original Message-----
Laszlo
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 8:04 AM
To: Reece Mills
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Security benefits of spliting services
between two ISP providers
Not exactly. If one ISP fails, the other could be used as a backup
system for the services that are on the "failed" isp. This could be
done
Post by Dave Hawkins
with a transparent proxy or something of the sort.
Regards,
Frank
Only part of what you need will be affected if one of your ISPs
fail.... Hope it is not the web based business services provider...
Hope it
is not the email provider....
Ok... What will be the security benefit of splitting services between
two ISP providers as you described?
Nothing.
Reece
|Hi group,
|
|What will be the security benefit of splitting services between two
|ISP providers?
|By splitting services I mean have one ISP serve only web based
|business services and other ISP serve the email and traffic generated
|by internal web browsing (or something similar).
|Right now everything goes through one ISP and second ISP connection
|is kept as a backup.
|
|Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|This communication is confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this communication by mistake, please notify us immediately
by responding to this email and then delete it from your system.
|Bulgarian Post Bank is not responsible for, nor endorses, any
opinion, recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement
or any information contained in this communication.
|Bulgarian Post Bank cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy
or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a
public network. If you suspect that the message may have been
intercepted or amended, please call the sender.
|_______________________________________________
|Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
|Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
|Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
|
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Post by Dave Hawkins
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
This communication is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication by mistake, please notify us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your system.
Bulgarian Post Bank is not responsible for, nor endorses, any opinion, recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement or any information contained in this communication.
Bulgarian Post Bank cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a public network. If you suspect that the message may have been intercepted or amended, please call the sender.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
V***@vt.edu
2005-05-20 02:42:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank Laszlo
You never really want to utilize 100% of your bandwidth, you should
always have some "extra" bandwidth "just in case." Sure, there are costs
involved, but as a business, surely one could make the decision on
whether or not to push it as an expense, or take the risk of only having
1 connection. I personally wouldnt split the services between the two
ISPs, I would simple have another connection for those "just in case"
situations. If a business relies heavily on internet, you shouldnt be
worried about a few extra bucks for a redundent connection. Just my 2 cents.
When a "few extra bucks" is $2,000/month, you start looking at it differently.

(NetworkVirginia commercial pricing is $1175/mo for a T-1 (1.5mbits), and if the
original poster has 3mbits/sec, it's 2 T-1s. So $2,000/mo isn't just a wild-ass
guess).
Frank Laszlo
2005-05-20 12:06:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by V***@vt.edu
Post by Frank Laszlo
You never really want to utilize 100% of your bandwidth, you should
always have some "extra" bandwidth "just in case." Sure, there are costs
involved, but as a business, surely one could make the decision on
whether or not to push it as an expense, or take the risk of only having
1 connection. I personally wouldnt split the services between the two
ISPs, I would simple have another connection for those "just in case"
situations. If a business relies heavily on internet, you shouldnt be
worried about a few extra bucks for a redundent connection. Just my 2 cents.
When a "few extra bucks" is $2,000/month, you start looking at it differently.
(NetworkVirginia commercial pricing is $1175/mo for a T-1 (1.5mbits), and if the
original poster has 3mbits/sec, it's 2 T-1s. So $2,000/mo isn't just a wild-ass
guess).
You really have to put it into perspective. $2,000/mo to a small company
is a lot of money, sure. But overall, any medium to large size company
will find it a very small investment for an even greater return. The
return being redudency. Which is why i said it woulc be a corporate
decision to make such an investment. If they company can afford it, By
all means they should.

Regards,
Frank
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
B***@kohls.com
2005-05-20 15:24:47 UTC
Permalink
Two providers, absolutely...but that's only part of the story. If you
want to approach the level of business continuity (because this is not at
all about security...this about redundancy and availability) you also need
to ensure dual entry points into your building from seperate trunks
(coming from different streets, etc) for your fiber or copper. Also you
probably want to consider SONET so that you have diverse routing as well.
Otherwise one backhoe still gets you, no matter how many carriers you
have. Using multiples is fine, using them together makes more sense than
just having duplicate capacity lying around doing nothing, however.

The way to look at it is pretty simple: What's the liklihood of a carrier
outage? What's the anticipated duration? Can I run with somewhat
degraded performance while the outage is being rectified? What is my
normal acceptable % utilization?

Once you have those answers you know how much "spare" bandwidth you need,
and you can split the total between your two (three, four, ad infinitum)
carriers of choice. There is no real need to keep a completely seperate
pipe sitting there dark. If you anticiptate so many outages in your data
communications that having a dark pipe in your pocket is a reasonable
plan, you have bigger issues.

Large, profitable companies don't throw money away either...and a thing to
remember...that SMB may only need a redundant T1 to follow your
scenario...while an F500/200/100 likely needs a T3/OC3/OC48 to handle the
same business...the needs scale upward as well, folks...so it's not
throwaway money no matter who you are.

Cheers,
Post by V***@vt.edu
Post by V***@vt.edu
Post by Frank Laszlo
You never really want to utilize 100% of your bandwidth, you should
always have some "extra" bandwidth "just in case." Sure, there are costs
involved, but as a business, surely one could make the decision on
whether or not to push it as an expense, or take the risk of only having
1 connection. I personally wouldnt split the services between the two
ISPs, I would simple have another connection for those "just in case"
situations. If a business relies heavily on internet, you shouldnt be
worried about a few extra bucks for a redundent connection. Just my 2 cents.
When a "few extra bucks" is $2,000/month, you start looking at it
differently.
Post by V***@vt.edu
(NetworkVirginia commercial pricing is $1175/mo for a T-1 (1.
5mbits), and if the
Post by V***@vt.edu
original poster has 3mbits/sec, it's 2 T-1s. So $2,000/mo isn't
just a wild-ass
Post by V***@vt.edu
guess).
You really have to put it into perspective. $2,000/mo to a small company
is a lot of money, sure. But overall, any medium to large size company
will find it a very small investment for an even greater return. The
return being redudency. Which is why i said it woulc be a corporate
decision to make such an investment. If they company can afford it, By
all means they should.
Regards,
Frank
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This is a transmission from Kohl's Department Stores, Inc.
and may contain information which is confidential and proprietary.
If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, copying or distribution or use of the contents of this message is expressly prohibited.
If you have received this transmission in error, please destroy it and notify us immediately at 262-703-7000.

CAUTION:
Internet and e-mail communications are Kohl's property and Kohl's reserves the right to retrieve and read any message created, sent and received. Kohl's reserves the right to monitor messages by authorized Kohl's Associates at any time
without any further consent.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
V***@vt.edu
2005-05-20 16:11:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by B***@kohls.com
(coming from different streets, etc) for your fiber or copper. Also you
probably want to consider SONET so that you have diverse routing as well.
SONET won't save you unless you *know* that you have *real* diversity (yes,
it's possible for the two loops to be from different providers, and *still*
end up going down different wavelengths on the *same* piece of glass... ;)

Getting two providers to cough up where the cable *actually* goes can be
really difficult - and it's even worse when everybody's cable uses the same bridge
or tunnel or whatever to get past a river or similar obstruction....
Madison, Marc
2005-05-18 13:34:01 UTC
Permalink
You would never have one ISP connection at 2M and the other at 1M, these
data lines would be redundant so that means both lines need to meet your
bandwidth requirements. So if your business bandwidth requirements are
3M then you would need to purchase two 3M lines in order for your
company to continue to do business in case of a disaster. The earlier
an email described utilizing both of your data lines all the time, this
is a good practice since you effectively get 6M throughput the majority
of the time until a disaster than your back to your business minimum of
3M. I hope this helps.

Marc

-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-***@lists.grok.org.uk
[mailto:full-disclosure-***@lists.grok.org.uk] On Behalf Of Rossen
S. Naydenov
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 2:00 AM
To: full-***@lists.grok.org.uk
Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] Security benefits of spliting services
between two ISP providers

I see what you mean guys.

But still I think there are some other things to consider.
Having two online ISP connections doubles the possibility of having bad
happening to you (attacks, floods, etc.), right?

On the other hand when speaking about bandwidth utilization things are
different. Let's see the two options:
First option - One ISP online and one offline
- Say we have 3Mbps online and that's it - both services will
share that bandwidth.
Second option - Two ISP online
- Say 2Mbps for business purposes on first ISP and 1Mbps for
other purposes on the second ISP.

But when speaking for total bandwidth I see that in the second option
total bandwidth is 2Mbps, while in first total is 3Mbps. What about
that?

In case of failure of one ISP (second option) we will have 2/3 or even
1/3 of the bandwidth we need... Having two ISP online with 3Mbps
available bandwidth is not good, because we will not be able to utilize
it.

Rossen

-----Original Message-----
From: Reece Mills [mailto:***@charter.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 8:38 PM
To: Dave Hawkins; ***@tvog.net; Rossen S. Naydenov
Cc: full-***@lists.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Security benefits of spliting services
between two ISP providers

Dave,
You and Frank have both made excellent points. Utilization of bandwidth
and risk reduction through splitting services across providers. I guess

I had taken a particularly narrow view in my initial response.

Splitting of services across different ISP's is not a bad idea. My note

vaguely addressed that. If a cost to benefit evaluation supports an
entity utilizing two separate ISP's. My question would be, Is this
extra expenditure necessary for the organization? An SLA with one ISP
might be enough to accomplish a logical space split for a fraction of
the costs of buying two SLA's from two providers. Now, if you are in an

area that is prone to natural and man made disasters (fires, flooding,
earthquakes and bombings) and since you are a global entity, then by all

means split services as described. However, if that is the case then
full redundancy would be my goal.

My apologies for the terse initial response. Sleep is a good thing and
I will try to get more of it.

Reece
Post by Dave Hawkins
In the case of DDoS, if your web services are targeted, your email
systems would still have plenty of bandwidth (splitting services in
that
Post by Dave Hawkins
way). Segmenting services like this would pose no real threat from a
security standpoint, and in my opinion, only allows you to more fully
utilize both lines that you're already paying for. In the case of
actual ISP failures, it is quite easy to use something like the Radware
LinkProof or WSD to handle complete fail-over to other network
providers. It can be (and is) easily done with a lot of our clients who
require high-availability for disasters, but also to prevent someone
from saturating a particular ISP link. Combine this with a
multi-segment IPS and you can minimize your risks greatly.
Don't misinterpret this as a plug for our products, but Radware has
been
Post by Dave Hawkins
in the high-availability and security space for a while now, and we get
these kinds of questions all the time.
Cheers,
-Dave Hawkins
Security Engineer
Radware
http://www.radware.com
-----Original Message-----
Laszlo
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 8:04 AM
To: Reece Mills
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Security benefits of spliting services
between two ISP providers
Not exactly. If one ISP fails, the other could be used as a backup
system for the services that are on the "failed" isp. This could be
done
Post by Dave Hawkins
with a transparent proxy or something of the sort.
Regards,
Frank
Only part of what you need will be affected if one of your ISPs
fail.... Hope it is not the web based business services provider...
Hope it
is not the email provider....
Ok... What will be the security benefit of splitting services between
two ISP providers as you described?
Nothing.
Reece
|Hi group,
|
|What will be the security benefit of splitting services between two
|ISP providers?
|By splitting services I mean have one ISP serve only web based
|business services and other ISP serve the email and traffic generated
|by internal web browsing (or something similar).
|Right now everything goes through one ISP and second ISP connection
|is kept as a backup.
|
|Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|This communication is confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this communication by mistake, please notify us immediately
by responding to this email and then delete it from your system.
|Bulgarian Post Bank is not responsible for, nor endorses, any
opinion, recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement
or any information contained in this communication.
|Bulgarian Post Bank cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy
or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a
public network. If you suspect that the message may have been
intercepted or amended, please call the sender.
|_______________________________________________
|Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
|Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
|Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
|
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Post by Dave Hawkins
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Disclaimer:

This communication is confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this communication by mistake, please notify us immediately by
responding to this email and then delete it from your system.
Bulgarian Post Bank is not responsible for, nor endorses, any opinion,
recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement or any
information contained in this communication.
Bulgarian Post Bank cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or
completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a public
network. If you suspect that the message may have been intercepted or
amended, please call the sender.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/


_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Loading...