?
Solved

VPN and MLPPP?

Posted on 2006-06-20
3
Medium Priority
?
1,445 Views
Last Modified: 2013-11-16
We are considering a 6MB committed T3 vs a 4 x T1 using MLPPP as our internet connection (from AT&T).  Because of our distance from a high-speed POP the T3 will cost over twice as much.

Around 2/3 of our traffic will be a VPN connection to our corporate office.    My understanding is that MLPPP (unlike load balancing) allows a single session to use the full bandwidth, but I want to make sure that there wouldn’t' be any issues with the VPN tunnel on MLPPP.

Primarily looking for someone who has done this before.
0
Comment
Question by:etude
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
3 Comments
 
LVL 12

Expert Comment

by:Scotty_cisco
ID: 16947367
We currently bond 3 T1's between 2 sites and you can do MLPPP and loadbalance per packet or should be able to.  I have not seen a situation were one user has been able to saturate the entire link.

Is that what your asking

See this solution

http://www.experts-exchange.com/Hardware/Routers/Q_21886560.html

this is a current example configuration....The biggest draw back is the limited ability to add more bandwidth as needed.  I would say if your cost is that much different then go with MLPPP no brainer seen the difference between a DS3 and this and pretty similar the DS3 did have considerable burstability though which was needed at the time.

Thanks
scott
0
 

Author Comment

by:etude
ID: 16947442
Partly.  The big difference is that our MLPPP connection would be with our ISP using a public IP address.  Traffic going out to the public internet would go straight out the router, no big deal.  The issue is that about 1/2 to 2/3 of our traffic is intra-office traffic going through a VPN tunnel to our corporate WAN.  The VPN tunnel would appear to the router as a single session.

I just want to make sure that the VPN will be able to use all available bandwidth and not be limited to 1.5.
0
 
LVL 16

Accepted Solution

by:
The--Captain earned 2000 total points
ID: 16955724
AFAIK, the channel-bonding and the VPN operate at completely different network layers - the bonded link should be transparent to any sort of VPN.

Cheers,
-Jon
0

Featured Post

Get 15 Days FREE Full-Featured Trial

Benefit from a mission critical IT monitoring with Monitis Premium or get it FREE for your entry level monitoring needs.
-Over 200,000 users
-More than 300,000 websites monitored
-Used in 197 countries
-Recommended by 98% of users

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

Most of the applications these days are on Cloud. Cloud is ubiquitous with many service providers in the market. Since it has many benefits such as cost reduction, software updates, remote access, disaster recovery and much more.
This article is in regards to the Cisco QSFP-4SFP10G-CU1M cables, which are designed to uplink/downlink 40GB ports to 10GB SFP ports. I recently experienced this and found very little configuration documentation on how these are supposed to be confi…
In this video we outline the Physical Segments view of NetCrunch network monitor. By following this brief how-to video, you will be able to learn how NetCrunch visualizes your network, how granular is the information collected, as well as where to f…
Monitoring a network: why having a policy is the best policy? Michael Kulchisky, MCSE, MCSA, MCP, VTSP, VSP, CCSP outlines the enormous benefits of having a policy-based approach when monitoring medium and large networks. Software utilized in this v…
Suggested Courses
Course of the Month11 days, 5 hours left to enroll

770 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question