LAN to LAN using IPSec

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.vpn (More info?)

> IS I have 2 vpn "concetrators" at 2 remote locations I can create an
> IPSec "tunnel" right? If I can and do this "tunnel" will the clients on
> one LAN be able to communicate with the clients on the other? Assuming my
> routes are good and im NAT'ed ok.

The normal way to connect 2 LANs is to use a VPN box (firewall,
router, concentrator etc.) at each end. Once they're configured
correctly, all traffic between the two locations goes through a VPN
tunnel between the two VPN boxes. Client computers are totally
oblivious to the fact that the communication was encrypted on the way.

> I dont get the difference between PPTP and IPSec. Other than the
> encrtyption aspect. I can get pptp running no problem and I "get it"
> but how's IPSec different?

VPN is a generic term for encrypting and authenticating traffic in a
public network. There are several competing protocols (actually
collections of protocols) for implementing a VPN; PPTP is one, IPSec
is another. For example, PPTP uses one method for key exchange, IPSec
uses another. I'm not familiar with PPTP, but I can say that IPSec is
notoriously complicated.

Hope this helps.
-- Rubio

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.vpn (More info?)

they use different ports and ipsec is stronger and has more encryption
options. use ipsec if possible.

"NixerX" <root@seraphim.jspazi.com> wrote in message
newsine.LNX.4.58.0407281157330.14956@seraphim.jspazi.com...
> Hello all,
> IS I have 2 vpn "concetrators" at 2 remote locations I can create an
> IPSec "tunnel" right? If I can and do this "tunnel" will the clients on
> one LAN be able to communicate with the clients on the other? Assuming my
> routes are good and im NAT'ed ok.
>
> I dont get the difference between PPTP and IPSec. Other than the
> encrtyption aspect. I can get pptp running no problem and I "get it"
> but how's IPSec different?
>
> thank you for your time and knowledge!
> J
>