On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 02:10:46PM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > What is the added value of etherpuppet over existing tools, such as
> > openvpn, tinc, gvpe, vde2? If there is none, or if the functionality
> > that is missing from etherpuppet can be easily integrated with one of
> > the existing tools, then you should tell upstream that it would be
> > better to invest time and energy in one of the other solutions.
>
> Well, etherpuppet is not really something to use as a simple vpn. You
> use it to really clone (including low level stuff) the interface on the
> remote side.
Ok, I see now that only one side of the etherpuppet tunnel uses a
tun/tap device, the other side copies everything to/from a real Ethernet
interface.
Still, the other tools I mentioned can all handle Ethernet frames. In
fact, tinc can be compiled to connect to a real Ethernet interface
instead of a tun/tap device, so it might already have the capability to
do what etherpuppet does. The advantage of these tools is that they can
provide encryption, and some of them can connect more than two endpoints
together.
The reason I urge you to consider having upstream merge his
functionality with one of the others is that otherwise there is yet
another tunnel tool out there.
--
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
Guus Sliepen <guus@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature