> > It's currently pushing 7:30 pm, and I was going to send out a reply
> > tomorrow. But indeed, it seems that Linux people prefer GRE tunnels,
> > we prefer (with good reason) IP tunnels, and the whole issue was one
> > of documentation. After changing my tunnel from GRE to IP, it worked
> > (and works) like a charm.
IIRC,
- Linux uses the ipip module to do IP-over-IP tunnel
- FreeBSD uses the gre(4) interface to do GRE tunnels
- GRE is a Cisco product and means ``Generic Routing
Encapsulation''. I don't know what they mean with the term
"Generic" because I have only seen IP encapsulated tunnel so far.
According to the GRE header, I guess GRE is far more powerful
than a simple IP-over-IP encapsulation, and I would be glad if
someone could explain us what are the benefits of this protocol.
I would conclude by saying that indeed Linux users tend to use
GRE tunnels whereas a IP-over-IP tunnel would be enough, because
they used to be trendy.
> What is the difference between gre and gif tunnels anyway... the man mages
> were not that informative...
Read above. Usually gre(4) tunnels are used as simple IP-over-IP tunnel,
so a gif(4) would do the same with less overload (due to GRE header size).
GRE seems far more powerful, but I don't know its benefits.
Regards,
--
Jeremie Le Hen
< jeremie at le-hen dot org >< ttz at chchile dot org >
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
