Mailing List Message #5802
From: Joe Laffey <>
Subject: Re: Sharing SIMS account over atalk
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 10:50:59 -0500 (CDT)
To: <>
On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, Mark Hartman wrote:

> At 6:21 AM -0700 4/21/00, Joe Laffey wrote:
> >I am trying to get some redundancy going and this is what I have done: I
> >have two Macs, each with SIMS. Each is on its own subnet, but the same
> >ethernet. The main server (A) shares (via Appletalk) it HD with the SIMS
> >folder. The Secondary server (B) is connected to A via Appletalk and has
> >an alias to the accounts folder of server A in its SIMS folder (server B).
> >This seems to work fine.
> >
> >I wondered if anyone, especially any of you fine Stalker folks, knew of a
> >reason NOT to do this (other than reliability of AppleTalk). I found that
> >it worked by just sharing the accounts. SIMS does seem to lock the account
> >file while accessing it. (Although the rror returned by the other server
> >when trying concurrent access is a bad username/password error, not a
> >POP.lock busy error.)
> >
> >The two machines still maintain separate queues.
> I have a similar setup:
>       DSL          Cable modem        Rather than set these up as two
>        |                 |            separate servers, however, one is
>    +-------+         +-------+        set up as secondary; that is, all
>    | SIMS+ |         | SIMS+ |        mail it receives for my domain is
>    | IPNR  |         | IPNR  |        sent (over the internal Ethernet)
>    +-------+         +-------+        to the other server.  IMO, the
>        | Internal E'Net  |            Mac is reliable enough that I'm
>        +--------+--------+            less concerned about users having
>                 |                     a short availability outage than
>             +-------+                 the possibility of dropping mail,
>             |  Hub  |-----> users     and this setup seems to work very
>             +-------+                 well.

Sorry for quoting the entire message, but I think some people might be
lost with it...

The reason I set it up as I did was so that users would still be able to
get POP access through the secondary line/subnet/server (ISDN) even if the
main line (T1) was down. (I do this via scripts that switch DNS with short
TTLs when there is a problem.)


Joe Laffey
LAFFEY Computer Imaging
St. Louis, MO
With no walls or fences on the Internet, who needs Windows or Gates?

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster