8 Jun
2012
8 Jun
'12
7:30 p.m.
Static IP isn't necessary for the "client"/LAN router with some VPN
protocols. I have a "portable" LAN /27 that I just plug in and turn on
using whatever local access I can get (wired or wireless) using L2TP.
Especially for Emcomm you wouldn't want the LANs tied to a specific or even
static public IP. Certs are nice, but would be burdensome, if you
suspect a set of credentials are compromised, delete them and reissue to
the designated "owner".
------------------------------
John D. Hays
K7VE
PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223
<http://k7ve.org/blog> <http://twitter.com/#!/john_hays>
<http://www.facebook.com/john.d.hays>
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Elias V. Basse III <kd5jfe(a)gmail.com> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
I agree, anyone who is serious about tunneling would have a static ip
making gre tunneling a viable and reliable option. Almost every os can do
it and it is very hinternet (hsmm) friendly.
Also a client certificate can be created guaranteeing identities of
clients.
I am more in favor of this than open VPN. It is also well documented.
Also gre is less processor intense than openvpn.
A test would of course be in order but seems simple enough.
Anyone experiment with the 1 watt cards on 430mhz from xagyl or others
that are basically wifi on 70cm? Be interested in what legal and
regulatory ramifications are for using for a non fast scan tv operation.
Before I buy them for testing of course.
KD5JFE
Elias
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net