[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       cipe
Subject:    Re: Cipe on 2.6.16.15
From:       Karl Kleinpaste <karl () charcoal ! com>
Date:       2006-05-13 17:05:29
Message-ID: vxk8xp5yhwm.fsf () mesquite ! charcoal ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Peter van den Heuvel <peter@bank-connect.com> writes:
> Cipe is well geared for
> equal-role server-to-server networks in a mesh configuration where you
> would typically use routing protocols like iBGP, OSPF or
> IS-IS. OpenVpn seems to work quite well where you want to connect
> clients to a server.
> I find it impossible (at this stage) to replace cipe with anything.

Considering that I replaced my first CIPE peering configuration with
OpenVPN in less than an hour (once I finally got around to experiment-
ing with it), I can't agree with you.

The addressing, gateways, static key management, and other details are
in effect identical; only the config file syntax is different.  There
is no reason why anything that used to involve "cipcb0" cannot now use
"tun0".  And I no longer have to deal with separating configuration
details from things like CIPE's ip-up script -- it's all in the one
configuration file, including gateway setting and so forth.

I have yet to deploy OpenVPN in a server-with-many-clients
environment, simply because I haven't needed it.  But for peering
configurations, it is network-equivalent to CIPE.

--
Message sent by the cipe-l@inka.de mailing list.
Unsubscribe: mail majordomo@inka.de, "unsubscribe cipe-l" in body
Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address.
CIPE info and list archive: <URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]