[pptp-server] PPTP masquerade && MS non-compliance

Jamin Collins JaminC at adapt-tele.com
Fri Jun 22 13:18:06 CDT 2001


Charlie Brady [mailto:charlieb at e-smith.com] wrote:
> > We need to consider not just whether someone else did something, 
> > but whether it is the right thing to do.  For me, it's simple, 
> > it's not the right thing to do.
> 
> Perhaps you could explain. Supporting multiple concurrent masqueraded
> connections to the same destination would add value to the 
> users. Can it be done? Can it be done reliably?

First, what are good reasons to have multiple connections to the same
destination?  Second, each connection has overhead associated with it, on
both ends.  Thus, two client machines routed through a single VPN connection
to a remote network has a better through put to overhead ratio than both
clients making their own connections.  As such it is better for the users to
stick with the current capabilities and look into routing these two systems
through a single connection.  

Could multiple connections be done?  Certainly (MS has already done exactly
this).  Can it be done reliably?  I would say yes.  But the true question
is: Should we do this?  Until this is decided the others are irrelevant.

Jamin W. Collins



More information about the pptp-server mailing list