Ed,

On the subject of using multiple names: it can work, as your system
shows. And, it should work, I agree. But, one improper reference and all
sorts of weird behavior starts to occur. When using different names for
interfaces, the NetBIOS name of a system will not be identical as the
name in DNS, and NetBackup will detect inconsistent name resolution and
fail. With Windows systems you do not know at all times what is resolved
in which way. Hence the recommendation to only use one name. Having
traffic redirected over a different interface can be done by binding
orders and host files. (As a side note: the biggest difference between
UNIX and Windows is the quality of the people working with them. Windows
admins are no always chosen for skills but for costs. Having systems
with multiple names complicates things. BTW, not that having multiple IP
addresses is comprehensible for some customers)

On rebooting the master server: correct, UNIX is more highly available
in that sense. Windows 2003 is a lot more stable than older Windows
versions, often I can even achieve a drive change without a reboot (but
strangely enough not always).

On using the GUI from a Windows server when the master is on UNIX:
correct. Again, the admins should be smart enough to understand this. I
often get complaints about the GUI being very slow. Using it from the
master server itself removes a couple of causes. Most of the times the
slow GUI is also caused by name resolution problems, however unlikely
that may seem to some customers.

CU,

Marcel

-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Wilts [mailto:ewilts at ewilts.org] 
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 1:41 PM
To: Drunen van, Marcel
Cc: james.c.siano at lmco.com; veritas-bu at mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Unix Master, Windows Media server possible?

On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 12:53:51PM +0200, Drunen van, Marcel wrote:
> The whole concept of NetBackup ensures multiplatform operations, which
> is one of the main reasons why I suggest it to my major customers. In
> general my advise is to have the master server on a Windows system, as
> the GUI is much easier to use (and often faster). 

I disagree.  Put the master server on a Unix system, and then use the
Windows GUI on a Windows media server or other server.  You'll get the
best of both worlds.

> The majority of problems I encounter with multi-OS systems is the
> slightly different way UNIX and Windows work with name resolution when
> multiple LAN segments are involved. Make sure your Windows system only
> has one network name, don't try to bind a different name to each NIC,
as
> you can easily do on UNIX systems. 

Again, I disagree.  Whenever possible, you should use a dedicated backup
interface and you can refer to it by its own name - i.e.
server.prod.foo.com for the front side and server.back.foo.com for the
backup network.  Just make sure that NetBackup is configured properly
and you won't have any problems.  We've been doing this for years.

The only place we've been hurt by this is if you have a master/media
server and try to use 2 names for the system at the same time (one for
the master functionality and one for the media functionality).  This
worked fine in the 3.x, 4.x, and 5.x days, but broke with 6.0.

> Plan your LAN segments carefully, make sure your binding order is
> correct. Preferably you should only use DNS for name resolution, 

I strongly agree.

> If your name resolution is consistent and your servers are on
> approximately the same patch level, multi-OS environments work fine.
It
> is also no problem to make a backup of a Windows server using a UNIX
> media server or vice-versa. 

Correct on both counts.  There were problems a few years ago with a
Windows client and FlashBackup when the master (and/or media) was Unix,
but that's been fixed.
 
> There are rumors about UNIX media servers being faster, or vice-versa,
> but that depends on the peculiarities of the individual systems. 

The biggest difference is the stability of the platform.  With Windows,
you'll find yourself rebooting whenever you have any tape drive
maintenance - add, replace, etc.  With Unix, you can just restart
NetBackup (which can be a pain by itself).

-- 
Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA
mailto:ewilts at ewilts.org