Hi, i need to know if somebody had been able to make it using adsl modems with dynamic ip (ddns, changeip, no-ip). Or perhaps with an alone one fixed and the rest dynamics using IPSEC? Now we have one server and seven remote nodes with ipcop and ipsec with psk, and I want to improve to Mikrotik.
Regards from Patagonia Argentina !!
Re: VPN without fixed ip through cities using adsl connections
The short answer is yes.
It would be easier if you have a single static address. Then the other locations could all connect back to this address.
Beyond that you can use dyndns.org but it's a bit tricky. just search around.
It would be easier if you have a single static address. Then the other locations could all connect back to this address.
Beyond that you can use dyndns.org but it's a bit tricky. just search around.
Re: VPN without fixed ip through cities using adsl connections
This is doable without issues. One IP helps, however, there are also some other services that are out there that provide centralized VPN connections at a data center and then let all of your offices and remote users connect to that.. This works really good for remote and roving users, as well as offices that have DSLs etc. This works good as there is not a single site bandwidth restriction based on the DSL etc, however, it may be more money than someone would be willing to pay. However, its doable, and works great! I have done this a great number of times.
It would be cheaper though, to get a single static on one site.
Something else to consider a solution like that, is the traffic. If all traffic goes to one site, then its better to bring them all back there, if not, it may be better to have the up/down capacity for site-site connectivity.
The example would be remote users connecting in, with multiple servers at each location. Some users access the server at location A and some location B. It would be smart not to double up the bandwidth usage at location A by having them VPN into Location A first, to access server B at location B. Why not VPN into location B, well dynamic IP may be one thing. But that is just one example. Also whats kewl about using a center like that, is that sometimes its great to put a server or mail system there to handle the load and spread out the distribution to the right people vs again, going from site A to site B, using both of their connections for mail going to only site B.
Just food for thought.
It would be cheaper though, to get a single static on one site.
Something else to consider a solution like that, is the traffic. If all traffic goes to one site, then its better to bring them all back there, if not, it may be better to have the up/down capacity for site-site connectivity.
The example would be remote users connecting in, with multiple servers at each location. Some users access the server at location A and some location B. It would be smart not to double up the bandwidth usage at location A by having them VPN into Location A first, to access server B at location B. Why not VPN into location B, well dynamic IP may be one thing. But that is just one example. Also whats kewl about using a center like that, is that sometimes its great to put a server or mail system there to handle the load and spread out the distribution to the right people vs again, going from site A to site B, using both of their connections for mail going to only site B.
Just food for thought.