Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 9 Jun 2005 09:01:36 +0930
From:      Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org>
Cc:        Marc Olzheim <marcolz@stack.nl>, FreeBSD-net@freebsd.org, Neo-Vortex <root@Neo-Vortex.net>
Subject:   Re: Problems with gif tunnels
Message-ID:  <20050608233136.GX64194@wantadilla.lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050608104053.GK41050@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org>
References:  <20050607093717.GA76296@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20050607100958.GU41050@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <20050607093717.GA76296@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20050607094848.GB16223@stack.nl> <20050607231218.GD64194@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20050608084946.GI41050@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <20050608095703.GM64194@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20050608195837.Q65103@Neo-Vortex.net> <20050608104053.GK41050@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--DNzU1U2E89wy37K+
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Wednesday,  8 June 2005 at 12:40:53 +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
>>> It's currently pushing 7:30 pm, and I was going to send out a reply
>>> tomorrow.  But indeed, it seems that Linux people prefer GRE tunnels,
>>> we prefer (with good reason) IP tunnels, and the whole issue was one
>>> of documentation.  After changing my tunnel from GRE to IP, it worked
>>> (and works) like a charm.
>
> IIRC,
>     - Linux uses the ipip module to do IP-over-IP tunnel
>     - FreeBSD uses the gre(4) interface to do GRE tunnels
>     - GRE is a Cisco product and means ``Generic Routing
>       Encapsulation''.  I don't know what they mean with the term
>       "Generic" because I have only seen IP encapsulated tunnel so far.
>       According to the GRE header, I guess GRE is far more powerful
>       than a simple IP-over-IP encapsulation, and I would be glad if
>       someone could explain us what are the benefits of this protocol.
>       I would conclude by saying that indeed Linux users tend to use
>       GRE tunnels whereas a IP-over-IP tunnel would be enough, because
>       they used to be trendy.
>
>> What is the difference between gre and gif tunnels anyway... the man mages
>> were not that informative...
>
> Read above.  Usually gre(4) tunnels are used as simple IP-over-IP tunnel,
> so a gif(4) would do the same with less overload (due to GRE header size).
> GRE seems far more powerful, but I don't know its benefits.

My understanding is that GRE is to IP as PPP is to SLIP: it allows
multiple protocols to be encapsulated.  I've done some tracing with
Ethereal, and the only difference is a four-byte header in front of
the payload for GRE; in an IP tunnel, it's simply missing.  I've
written this up in my diary
(http://www.lemis.com/grog/diary-jun2005.html#8), along with the
traces.

Greg
--
The virus contained in this message was not detected.

Finger grog@FreeBSD.org for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.

--DNzU1U2E89wy37K+
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFCp3/YIubykFB6QiMRAvJhAJ9ZXgVqwnVxPcT/cpV1Ld5q7BHmVQCgkn/U
VXCnZJmSsXNWjpPERF6tlJ0=
=TJXq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--DNzU1U2E89wy37K+--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050608233136.GX64194>