Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: NIC to NIC connection

From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
To: Matt Clark <matt(at)ymogen(dot)net>
Cc: 'Kent Anderson' <kenta(at)ezyield(dot)com>,"'Pgsql-Admin(at)Postgresql(dot) Org'" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: NIC to NIC connection
Date: 2004-10-19 22:01:33
Message-ID: 20041019220133.GA2957@wolff.to (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 17:37:43 +0100,
  Matt Clark <matt(at)ymogen(dot)net> wrote:
> You would assign a different subnet to the connection, and then tell the
> servers to connect to the PG server's address on that subnet.  No other
> changes required.  Very odd setup though.  If you want a 'private'
> connection then use a switch, rather than needing umpty NICs in the PG
> server.

Switches are not security devices. While it is harder to sniff packets on
switches, you can't count on them to prevent hostile machines on the
switch from playing games with the arp protocol. Also I believe that if
a switch doesn't remember where a particular mac address is it will send
the packet to all of the attached ports.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Matt ClarkDate: 2004-10-19 22:13:44
Subject: Re: NIC to NIC connection
Previous:From: Stephan SzaboDate: 2004-10-19 20:09:55
Subject: Re: pgsql database .1 .2 .3 file names

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group