Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 11:23:31 +0100 From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> To: Andrew McNaughton <andrew@squiz.co.nz> Cc: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org>, freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vpn: swan, ssh/ppp or skip Message-ID: <199904071023.LAA25106@keep.lan.Awfulhak.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 07 Apr 1999 17:12:05 %2B1200." <199904070512.RAA03864@aniwa.sky>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Any arrangement that routes through a TCP tunnel means that if a packet has to be re-transmitted then all of the connections routed through the tunnel have to wait for it. > > This isn't going to be an issue for light usage, and ssh makes a lot of sense for things like connecting into a remote network from home, but it's probably not the best for linking networks together with more than a few people at either end. I agree. Something like nos-tun is better WRT not having the extraneous layer, but it also can't encrypt/compress.... > Andrew McNaughton [.....] > ----------- > Andrew McNaughton > andrew@squiz.co.nz > http://www.newsroom.co.nz/ -- Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org> <brian@FreeBSD.org> <brian@OpenBSD.org> <http://www.Awfulhak.org>; Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour ! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199904071023.LAA25106>