Should be fine. Both models have built-in VPN accelerators, should haven't a couple megabit without skipping a beat.
Chuck Church Principal Network Engineer, CCIE #8776 Harris Information Technology Services EDS Contractor - Navy Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) 1210 N. Parker Rd. | Greenville, SC 29609 Office: 864-335-9473 | Cell: 864-266-3978 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Greene Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 11:48 AM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] redundant VPNs Hi, A customer of ours has two sites, one with an 1800 the other with a 2800. There's a point-to-point T1 connecting the locations. The two locations also have a backup link through my network via DSL. The customer wants to establish a VPN between the two locations over the ptp T1, and a backup VPN over the DSL lines in case the ptp T1 goes down. I should be able to rely on the 1800/2800 for this, shouldn't I? I can add sonicwalls on each end if needed, but I think the routers should be able to handle it alone. What do you think? Thanks, Adam _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/