On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Kingsley Charles <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Tyson
>
> I have just put my understanding. Am I missing something?
>
>
> With regards
> Kings
>
>   On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Tyson Scott <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>  Kingsley,
>>
>>
>>
>> Is this a question or statement?  Not sure.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dnyaneshwar,
>>
>>
>>
>> As VTI is a re-design of legacy VPN all the security features of the older
>> methodology are there but you just have new advantages.  If you are familiar
>> with the two, to be honest there is no reason not to use the newer
>> methodology over the legacy in a production environment due to the
>> simplicity of VTI’s.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S and Security
>>
>> Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
>>
>>
>> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
>> Cell: +1.248.504.7309
>> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
>> Mailto:  [email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>> Join our free online support and peer group communities:
>> http://www.IPexpert.com/communities <http://www.ipexpert.com/communities>
>>
>>
>>
>> IPexpert - The Global Leader in Self-Study, Classroom-Based, Video On
>> Demand and Audio Certification Training Tools for the Cisco CCIE R&S Lab,
>> CCIE Security Lab, CCIE Service Provider Lab , CCIE Voice Lab and CCIE
>> Storage Lab Certifications.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
>> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Kingsley
>> Charles
>> *Sent:* Monday, September 21, 2009 2:46 AM
>> *To:* Dnyaneshwar Gore
>> *Cc:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Security] IPSec Virtual Tunnel Interface
>> queries
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi D.M.Gore
>>
>>
>>
>> It's like comparing Apples and Oranges. Both of them have their own
>> advantages and dis-advantages. I do like to change the subject here - VTI Vs
>> Physical Interface Based IPSec.
>>
>>
>>
>> Earlier, we just define a crypto map with interesting traffic, transform
>> set and the peer. This is a static IPSec.
>>
>>
>>
>> With VTI, there are two types - Static VTIs (SVTI) and Dymanic VTIs
>> (DVTI).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> SVTI - You use Tunnel interface in "IPSec mode". All you have to do,
>> associate an IPSec profile. Any traffic routed through this interface is
>> encrypted. This is static and point to point. The tunnel interface is
>> sourced to a physical interface.
>>
>>
>>
>> SVTI is like site to site VPN, where the peers should be configured on
>> both sides
>>
>>
>>
>> DVTI - You use virtual-templalte. This is dymamic. Virtual-access is
>> created, when any traffic is routed through the interface. Usually,
>> virtual-template is to the features. For VTI based EzVPN, the VTI is
>> associated to the ISAKMP profile.
>>
>>
>>
>> DVTI is like dynamic crypto maps. One like is configured with peer
>> configuration. Each dynamic peer connecting to the server, will have create
>> a virtual-access.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Based on the requirement, we need to decide which to take.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> With regards
>>
>> Kings
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Dnyaneshwar Gore <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Reply via email to