[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: some issues about IPSec
> I don't think I agree with either of your assertions.
>
> The remote client is going to suffer from bandwidth constraints because
> they can't push out many bytes (slow modems). Those people using
> slow modems will want to squeeze as much bandwidth out of their modems
> as possible. Adding another header cuts the number of bytes they can pump.
> In this case, tunnel mode would be a detriment. The transformation is
> trivial, the extra bytes are not trivial for 28.8 modem users.
>
This is not true. Transport mode requires more overhead for
fragmentation, and even if it's built directly into the stack the
bottleneck isn't in the extra header information, it's in the routing
process and hub congestion, not in the 28.8 modem.
As a very simple view, when your using your modem, most of the time is not
spent with the tx/rx lights flashing constantly (full bandwidth
utilization), most of the time is spent waiting for responses (which is
where the bottleneck is).
Usually ISP bandwidth is oversold, which removes the bottleneck even
further from the modem.
Jeffrey Goodwin
** Ashley Laurent,Inc. ** Software Development ** Consulting **
* * *
* 707 West Avenue, Suite 201 * voice: 512-322-0676 *
* Austin, Texas 78701 * fax : 512-322-0680 *
* web: http://www.osgroup.com *
* Microsoft Solution Provider * Complete Systems Design/Development *
* Novell Professional Developer * Systems Software/Device Drivers *
References: