<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]

To: "Les Mikesell" <les,AT,futuresource,DOT,com>
Subject: RE: CIPE & Linux bridging
From: "Mackay, Scott" <SMackay,AT,progeny,DOT,net>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 10:30:21 -0400
Cc: <cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de>
Thread-index: AcQeM8i162HlfvhjSuKQ7tRfE+8qzgACrrtQ
Thread-topic: CIPE & Linux bridging

Actually, I really just need something which can do both broadcast and 
multicast in a tunnel sans encryption.  The tunel really just exists to carry 
those items across mediums which may not support multicast/broadcasts without 
it being in a tunnel.
I am not sure, but with tunnels (CIPE or others), is there latency 
introducted by the tunnel?  It would seem, if a tunnel places multiple 
original packets in a tunnel packet, that there may be some artificial 
latency while a tunnel 'waits' for packets to fill a buffer.  If this is the 
case, then a solution which can configure this allowed latency would be 
great.  I saw GRE (well, saw the title and how expandable it was) but was 
looking at CIPE because I really don't need huge things from a tunnel.  
Thanks for any info in advance!!

-Scott

>
> Does it have to be udp?  Linux has GRE tunnels built in. I've
> never tried bridging over them but I've used them to build
> a tunnel to a Cisco router and run multicast over them.


<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]