"Jeffrey J. Kosowsky" <backuppc < at > kosowsky.org> wrote on 01/16/2012 05:00:45
PM:
The problem is that my new Verizon router does not allow the same IP
address to be correlated with different MAC addresses.
So now it seems that I can only match the laptop name (used by
BackupPC) against only one of the IP addresses so that it will only
get backed up on one of the two interfaces?
Is there any simple way to overcome this problem?
You could:
1) Use a better (real) Firewall
That would be, by *FAR*, the best solution. Other solutions:
2) Use a better (real) DNS server with client-update capabilities (See #1)
3) Use a better (real) DHCP server (See #1)
You certainly have a good point in theory and that would be the
correct approach for a larger/more formal network. But for me, it's
just a simple home network... I really don't want to start adding a
new/separate firewall and/or DNS and/or DHCP layer just to get
BackupPC to run when everything runs just fine using my
Verizon-provided router as router/firewall/gateway/dns/dhcp etc. (I do
have a software firewall also on each machine).
These are really just more specific details embodied by #1. Now that I've
beat that dead horse...
4) Use NetBIOS name resolution. (This merely lets you substitute a
completely *different* and hopefully less broken name server
infrastructure. See #1...
)
Same reasoning as above... And I really would like to avoid NetBIOS
since I don't even have it running on my Linux machines...
For example would it be possible to match 2 IP/names addresses against
the same host backup so that if one fails then it tries the other?
(this is in a sense the opposite of ClientNameAlias that allows you to
map multiple hosts to one IP address)
Why fix an IP routing/name resolution issue at the BackupPC level? Fix it
where the problem is, rather than paper over it. While 'another layer of
indirection can fix anything' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indirection ,
second paragraph), it doesn't mean that it *should*!
If you want to
go that way, there's always
Well while you are right in theory and from an 'elegance' perspective,
since the only problem is BackupPC, I actually would prefer a simpler
and more targeted solution that doesn't require me to redo or change
my network -- even if it is a bit klugey...
5) Create two BackupPC hosts, one for each of the IP addresses your
Verizon DHCP server will be assigning to the client...
And then, knowing your ability to create great little Perl utilities to
manipulate the BackupPC pool:
6) Create a tool to merge the backups of one host into the other...
Well, I appreciate your confidence, but that would be a real PITA.
That being said, I do at some point intent plan on writing just such a
utility that a more general level allows for the merging of two
different pools... but I haven't had the time
P.S.: In case it doesn't come across in text: I give you honest,
serious, mad props for your Perl code that manipulates the pool, though I
personally am very reluctant to use them. However, I still think you need
to fix this problem where the problem actually *is*, rather than paper
over it with BackupPC mangling.
T.J.M.
Thanks.
Again, if I were running a large network or a production server, I
would totally agree with you.
But it might just be simpler, easier, and cleaner for me to hack the
BackupPC code so that if one host ip name/number then it tries
another...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users < at > lists.sourceforge.net
List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
