On Wed, 9 May 2001, Alfred R. Collins wrote: > Our network engineer proposed ATM PVC's as a means to route Internet traffic > across our corporate backbone. This is good solution. > Obviously, the best approach is to carry the > Internet traffic on totally separate channels. That costs too much money. Thus this is not the BEST approach. > However, we have to distribute Internet access to far flung sites on > our corporate owned network, and network engineering does not want to > pay for independent communication channels. It's good. Having ATM you may do (from user level) the same thing as if you had many phisicaly diffrent lines. > They insist on using the existing corporate network > infrastructure because it is already there. Seems them can count money. =D > I proposed VPN's as more secure than PVCs. That's almost wrong. Buy a popular book on ATM & read on. Seems you don't undestand what is ATM PVCs. PVCs can secure your network & VPNs can also. But them are working at diffrent level & it seem to be harder to hack ATM PVCs then VPNs. The difference is usualy at an end-point - with PVCs you must hack victims routers/switches & with PVCs you may attack end-user systems (via MUA/web browsers & other stuff transparent to network layer you may upload a trojan stuff). > Any other alternatives? Lots of. Buy a book on networking or just thisit www.cisco.com & buy theirs CD - it contains configuring cisco hardware notes & also LAN building notes. & if you have ATM at your network - just thisit your net-enginiears & ask them what should you read around secure networking. > I am looking for feedback on using PVC's > versus VPN's as a security barrier between our corporate network and the > Internet. Them both may be used & them both securing the network, but PVCs are more transparent & harder to hack. > Note I am proposing that VPN's provide security in the reverse > direction than how they are typically used. Rather than protecting traffic > inside the VPN transversing an insecure network, I am proposing that a VPN > can protect a corporate network from the insecure Internet traffic confined > within the VPN. Is this a valid assumption? This is too short & small to a wide view. In some cases you may be right in some you may be wrong. > Note: both ends of the VPN > terminate at a firewall that we control. Comments? In this case PVCs are MUCH better. -- Bye.Olli MISiS Telecommunications phone: +7(095)955-0087
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu May 10 2001 - 14:27:58 PDT