Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.networking > #614
| Date | 2011-09-20 18:29 +0200 |
|---|---|
| From | KR <kristian.rasmussen@broadpark.no.spam.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.networking |
| Subject | Re: Ipsec tunnel mode vs ip in ip with ipsec transport |
| References | <b9de21b8-26d5-430d-a139-b115e9fe60a8@ge10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> |
| Message-ID | <4e78bf81$1@news.broadpark.no> (permalink) |
On 20.09.2011 13:05, Reji wrote: > Is there any difference/advantage in using an "ip in ip tunnel > encrypted with ipsec transport mode" over using directly the "ipsec > tunnel mode". An IP in IP tunnel has a tunnel device at each end, and the tunnel creates a virtual point-to-point connection between them. The tunnel may then be encrypted using IPsec transport mode. Traffic is sent through the tunnel by routing it to the IP address of the tunnel interface at the other end. In IPsec tunnel mode, it appears to the routers as if traffic is simply routed to the existing gateway. There is no tunnel interface, and the tunnel definitions at each end decide which traffic is to go through the tunnel.
Back to comp.os.linux.networking | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Ipsec tunnel mode vs ip in ip with ipsec transport Reji <rejithomas.d@gmail.com> - 2011-09-20 04:05 -0700 Re: Ipsec tunnel mode vs ip in ip with ipsec transport KR <kristian.rasmussen@broadpark.no.spam.com> - 2011-09-20 18:29 +0200
csiph-web