On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Brian Desmond <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'm not talking private WAN, I'm talking VPN. Using the public Internet to >> carry >> a secure tunnel for a private payload. > > That's basically private WAN...
We're splitting hairs now, but hey, this is the Internet, that's what we do. :-) To my thinking, a "private WAN" is a "private (wide area) network", while a "VPN" is a "virtual private network". The one uses dedicated circuits, the other does not; hence "virtual". :) Going back to the original question of "cloud or not?": We have two scenarios: (1) You're running an application on one of your systems which communicates with an undefined number of servers hosted by a third-party off-site. Communication is carried over the public Internet. Communication is secured by having your system encrypt the traffic into a secure tunnel using SSL. (2) You're running an application on one of your systems which communicates with an undefined number of servers hosted by a third-party off-site. Communication is carried over the public Internet. Communication is secured by using a separate appliance which encrypts the traffic into a secure tunnel using SSL. As I understand it, you're saying the first is "cloud", but the second is not? :) -- Ben ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to [email protected] with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
