Feature Request - Select NIC/Virtual IP for backup

[ninjaburn81]

Since this product is supporting Windows Server, one thing that would be nice would be the ability to select which NIC (or Virtual IP address) for the backup to be run over.

For instance, if you have a dedicated VLAN (or even just a dedicated, perhaps non-routed subnet) for backup. Or if you have two NICs on the same subnet, but are separate ports. This way we are not flooding one NIC with backup data plus production data.

[ninjaburn81]

...con't

And possibly the option to use all/any available NICs if network is idle?

[ITP-Stan]

workaround: Use network address that are only attached/reachable on the NIC you want and not the other. You could use a separate network range just for this.

[Vitaliy S.]

Stan is spot on! Also you can adjust hosts file on the server to route network traffic to the target storage properly.

[ninjaburn81]

The hosts files can work along with the change in IP addresses, just looking for options at are as "clean" as possible, since if you use this on a server, it may not always be the same admin working on the server.

[Mike Resseler]

Adam,

The possibility to select a "backup network" will create a lot of confusion for people that use this as an endpoint solution. Imagine somebody like me that has actually 2 networks connected on my laptop a lot of times. I'm connected on the wifi and connected to a lan also. Now my laptop is doing whatever it needs to do without me caring about it

However, I agree with the above, and this is something what I have done for years, is using hosts files, and changing the routing table, to make sure that this traffic runs over the correct network.

My 2 cents

Mike

[ninjaburn81]

Mike:

I definitely see your point and agree from an endpoint if it is laptop/end user PC. Different on the server side tho, but I guess even I need to remind myself of the target users of this product sometimes.

And I suppose I could always just modify DNS entries if I didn't want to use host files...

[hoFFy]

...The possibility to select a "backup network" will create a lot of confusion for people that use this as an endpoint solution. ...

Why not use a standard gui and an advanced settings option?
The feature to select the correct nic of the VBR / repo constellation would be really helpful!
In my situation our VBR has several NICs, all but one are connected to networks which are not reachable direct from client side. The repository for Endpoint are local drives in the VBR. What Endpoint does is trying to reach the VBR on all other NICs first, instead of selecting the reachable one. This leads to several timeouts in the Endpoint logs and some time passes until backup starts.
This is not an error which makes Endpoint stop working, but I don't like errors, warnings, timeouts

[Mike Resseler]

Sebastian,

We have been discussing this option internally already for many times... And the topic will certainly come back a few times more

A standard GUI and an advanced settings is indeed a possibility. But what do you think about the end-user only to have a standard UI, and all advanced settings being arranged through a centralized management solution. You might have heard a couple of days ago that we announced a soon to come plugin for LabTech to provide central management.

Thoughts?

Mike

[hoFFy]

Mike,

I didn't mean to enable advanced settings being arranged through a centralized management solution, but rather a button in the gui "advanced settings".
The question about centralized management is: Which way do you want to go?
- Establish Endpoint as a complete standalone product, free-for-all to make the name "Veeam" more common in everyones head (if they ever think about their server backup, they already know "Veeam")
- Or is Endpoint just a "nice-to-have" thing which is more a "little brother" of VBR and comes to full functionaly only together with VBR. In that case, centralized management should be only possible (and thats the way I would prefer, not from the technical, more than from the economical point). The last one would be another argument to keep it free for users. Co-financing via VBR licenses with equal prices as of now sounds better to me (and I believe all other customers), than creating a simple free-to-use version and an advanced pay-per-use version.
I'm sorry if I offend someone with my thoughts, its not my task to philosophize about Veeams future business plans, but I'm asking myself from the first day of Endpoint how this can be kept free with all the manpower that needs to be invested in such a nice product.
My thoughts on LabTech? I didn't know this monitoring solution before, but I just informed my colleagues about this alternative to our monitoring tools

I still belive that managing should only be possible via VBR, and Endpoint itself should be able to handle all stuff needed to work as a standalone product on its own, including email alerts & co.

[Mike Resseler]

Sebastian,

You DID NOT offend someone, on the contrary, we like these kind of discussions very much. The more input we get, the better

That said, I take note that you prefer a button in the gui called advanced settings . For the centralized management, we started with LabTech and looking further down the road now. But do know that there will always be a VEBF standalone... For free but yes, centralized management is another thing and will probably not be free in the future.

And again, thanks for the feedback... Keep it coming

Mike

[hoFFy]

... That said, I take note that you prefer a button in the gui called advanced settings ...

Correct

What about a free plugin for VBR customers and paid management console for those not using VBR but interested in centralized management. This could probably include the transport agents / proxy from VBR to route traffic to the central Endpoint repository to enable deduplication not within the client itself, but deduplication in all Endpoint backups. I understand that this needs to redesign several lines of code... but it would be another nice feature, if you don't want to rely on the Server 2012 / 2016 deduplication features. Backup copy to tape and so on are other nice things that could be included in such a solution... the more I think about it... the more I belive in the enormous potential of Endpoint as a seperate backup solution

[Mike Resseler]

Got it!

PS: I might misunderstand you here, but if you point VEBF to a backup repository, you can already do backup copy job from there to tape... or to another repository, or to a cloud repository.

Cheers

Mike

[hoFFy]

Yes you misunderstood me. I was thinking of Endpoint together with a centralized management solution, like "Veeam Endpoint Solution" or so... and was dreaming of possible features which could be included in a new solution for those users who don't own VBR (maybe just because they don't own a virtualized server) but would like to have centralized management and some of the features which are already possible in VBR.