Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 5 May 2011 13:15:08 -0700
From:      David Brodbeck <gull@gull.us>
To:        Free BSD Questions list <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Can I bridge the same subnet across a VPN?
Message-ID:  <BANLkTikv=5nmJ447vmzyJtHv36+qcgnEVg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DC2E0CA.9020902@gmx.com>
References:  <201105040519.56695.geoff@apro.com.au> <BANLkTimCMBvCQqOE=8Xfd9_ZF-aQeWBGEA@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=BfGDvym1GyBmvooMn1dbhT4UcTA@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTintKC1TgFmrjaFgSMtsd7DCcz1Fzg@mail.gmail.com> <4DC2E0CA.9020902@gmx.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Nikos Vassiliadis <nvass@gmx.com> wrote:
> There is no inbuilt reason why a L2 VPN is more easily saturated
> than a L3 VPN.

I disagree slightly.  With L2 you have broadcasts and non-routable
protocols being sent over the wire.  This is fortunately becoming less
of an issue than it used to be, but it can (for example) be a problem
for certain kinds of Windows networking.  I have had severe congestion
problems in the past when bridging wired interfaces to wireless.

In general I think adding a slow hop that's invisible to clients is
asking for trouble, but that's not to say it can't work well in
certain environments.  The main thing to remember is just because the
clients can pretend it's a LAN doesn't mean you can. ;)



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTikv=5nmJ447vmzyJtHv36+qcgnEVg>