On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 02:49:53PM +0200, Martin Schrvder wrote:
> 2009/5/24, Stuart Henderson :
> > The "P" (Private) suggests some kind of privacy.
>
> "MPLS is well suited to the task as it provides traffic isolation and
> differentiation without substantial overhead."
>
Doesn't the public I
2009/5/24, Stuart Henderson :
> The "P" (Private) suggests some kind of privacy.
"MPLS is well suited to the task as it provides traffic isolation and
differentiation without substantial overhead."
Best
Martin
On 2009-05-24 10:49, Stuart Henderson wrote:
Where in 'VPN' do you see some kind of encryption? Intranets were
build on FR clouds, ATM clouds, now on IP clouds. If your understanding
of VPN means "IPsec" then maybe it's time to get back to some serious
learning about the real world out there.
T
Il giorno dom, 24/05/2009 alle 09.52 +0200, Eukasz Bromirski ha scritto:
> Is there any place to read on about it? Any draft howtos, man pages,
> etc?
Sorry, no man pages yet.
> Is it in latest development build or already in 4.5?
4.5 ships a very embryonic stack mostly coded during n2k9, while
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 08:49:02AM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2009-05-24, ?ukasz Bromirski wrote:
> >> It is not a "VPN" in any sense that you use over the internet or any
> > > public network (such as a commercial telco)
> >
> > Where in 'VPN' do you see some kind of encryption? Intranet
On 2009-05-24, ?ukasz Bromirski wrote:
>> It is not a "VPN" in any sense that you use over the internet or any
> > public network (such as a commercial telco)
>
> Where in 'VPN' do you see some kind of encryption? Intranets were
> build on FR clouds, ATM clouds, now on IP clouds. If your understan
On 2009-05-02 18:37, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
What's really frustrating here are the network admins I work with that
are trying to migrate from ipsec vpns to MPLS because it's "easier"
and "just as secure".
Typical networking idiots.
Maybe yes.
> Some telcos sell an "MPLS IP VPN" service which
On 2009-04-29 21:48, Michele Marchetto wrote:
Il giorno mar, 28/04/2009 alle 20.18 -0400, Daniel Ouellet ha scritto:
So, I am not sure where this is and I am curious as to what stage it
might be?
We are moving things forward.
The current stack have really basic functionalities but it is workin
Joe S [js.li...@gmail.com] wrote:
>
> What's really frustrating here are the network admins I work with that
> are trying to migrate from ipsec vpns to MPLS because it's "easier"
> and "just as secure".
>
> Yaargh.
>
Typical networking idiots. Some telcos sell an "MPLS IP VPN" service which is
On 30 Apr 2009, at 00:14, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
Joe S wrote:
What's really frustrating here are the network admins I work with
that
are trying to migrate from ipsec vpns to MPLS because it's "easier"
and "just as secure".
Well, I am not sure that it would be very convincing to them, but I
Joe S wrote:
What's really frustrating here are the network admins I work with that
are trying to migrate from ipsec vpns to MPLS because it's "easier"
and "just as secure".
Well, I am not sure that it would be very convincing to them, but I
guess a somewhat good argument to use might be as si
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Michele Marchetto wrote:
> Il giorno mar, 28/04/2009 alle 20.18 -0400, Daniel Ouellet ha scritto:
>> So, I am not sure where this is and I am curious as to what stage it
>> might be?
>
> We are moving things forward.
> The current stack have really basic functiona
Michele Marchetto wrote:
Il giorno mar, 28/04/2009 alle 20.18 -0400, Daniel Ouellet ha scritto:
So, I am not sure where this is and I am curious as to what stage it
might be?
We are moving things forward.
The current stack have really basic functionalities but it is working.
I use it. Now it s
Il giorno mar, 28/04/2009 alle 20.18 -0400, Daniel Ouellet ha scritto:
> So, I am not sure where this is and I am curious as to what stage it
> might be?
We are moving things forward.
The current stack have really basic functionalities but it is working.
I use it. Now it support just static label
Hi,
I saw many changes in CVS for that and even on the wanted list for
equipment compatibility testing as well.
So, I am not sure where this is and I am curious as to what stage it
might be?
No complaint here, just curious what might be the current stage of it.
Is it somewhat usable with a
15 matches
Mail list logo