udp

2014-01-23
2014-01-26
  • Peter Maivald

    Peter Maivald - 2014-01-23

    Is there any provision in the sstp standard to allow for tunneling over udp? Or, is there some other solution for fixing the instability caused by tunneling tcp over tcp?

     
  • Eivind

    Eivind - 2014-01-23

    Hi Peter,
    With instability you mean current client doesn't provide you a stable VPN connection, or are you referring to the TCP over an TCP/IP tunnel? In case of the latter, the SSTP specification only specifies IP over an SSL tunnel using TCP/IP and was really mean to be a option for folks where L2TP/PPTP was no longer an option (e.g. your VPN connection is being blocked by a router).

    Regards,
    - Eivind

     
  • Peter Maivald

    Peter Maivald - 2014-01-23

    Hi Eivind,

    I'm not actually having a problem with this, it's more of a theoretical question. I've read a couple of articles about instability while tunneling tcp over tcp. Here's one that explains it clearly:

    http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/tcp-tcp.html

    Since this was written some time ago, I thought that a solution may have been found, or that the problem wasn't actually that serious to begin with. However, if this is a problem, then tunneling http, smb, etc. over sstp is impacted. I just wondered what your thoughts were on this.

    Peter

     
  • Eivind

    Eivind - 2014-01-26

    Thank you Peter,

    I actually did know of this, and it is really a fundamental problem in how the TCP protocol is designed. There is no current solution to it as far as I know.

    The sstp-client was intended to permit Linux and Mac users the ability to access a Windows network when PPTP and L2TP protocols falls short. If you are concerned with performance, other protocols like IPSEC far much better.

    • Eivind
     

Log in to post a comment.