Hi,

I could find following advantages of IPsec VTI over native IPSec VPN:

   - VPN session is applied on Tunnel interface and not on physical
   interface. This allows "always-on"  VPN tunnel through multiple physical
   interfaces (multiple path).
   - IPSec VTI encryptes packets based on routing whereas native IPSec VPN
   does it base on complex access-list.
   - IPSec VTI supports unicast and multicast traffic such as OSPF or RIP
   packets. Hence dynamic routing adjancies can be achieved using IPSec VTI.
   This is not possible with Native IPSec VPN.
   - Interface features like QoS, NAT, Netflow and other security related
   features can be applied to Virtual Tunnel interface.

My queries are :

   - Are there any limitations for IPsec VTI compare to native IPSec VPN?
   (One I could find is traffic filtering cannot be done as encryption done on
   routing basis.....is this correct?)
   - Is IPSec VTI is safe and strong enough as equal to native IPSec VPN?
   (As per my understanding it is as VTI uses transform set and IKE proposals
   same as in native IPSec VPN)
   - Will IPSec VTI work if intermidate device doing NAT?
   - What are ports used for establishing IPsec VTI between two peers? (I
   guess same as native IPSec VPN)


Can we say IPsec VTI is best compare to native IPSec VPN and we can use it
instead of native IPSec VPN?

Regards,
D.M.Gore
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Reply via email to