From: Brant I. Stevens (bistevens@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Jun 15 2001 - 12:05:05 GMT-3
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
You can carry multicast traffic over a GRE Tunnel, allowing you to
run routing protocols, use multicast, etc...
- -Brant
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "jhuston" <jhuston@Paracom.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 10:11 AM
Subject: RE: IPSec and GRE
> I know in the cases that I have worked on, that a GRE tunnel clear
> up timing problems between the various interfaces of a PIX, Router
> and mobile users. I agree that it seems to be a conservative
> approach but a workable one.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew G. Mason [mailto:andrew@masontech.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 5:40 PM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: IPSec and GRE
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I see quite a few posts and recommendations to use GRE
> > tunnels with IPSec.
> > This confuses me because IPSec performs tunnelling in its default
> > configuration anyway so I cannot see any reason for
> > tunnelling through a
> > tunnel?
> >
> > Can anybody give a good reason to use a GRE tunnel instead of
> > the default
> > IPSec tunnel mode configuration?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > Andrew G. Mason
> > CCIE #7144
> > **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
> **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOyokHv8m30XxCss3EQIlOwCdFGuSlV6dcJxYRinvAU7zIygcoxYAnRKH
5UCm7WSvmtKQ/8woH2XlcA5G
=AbYR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:31:24 GMT-3