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 
  



On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Elias V. Basse III <kd5jfe@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@hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net