At any rate... if I were in your shoes and really restricted to the options you propose, I would go with CIFS mounts through IPSEC tunnels.
Wouldn't IPSEC add more overhead than an SSH tunnel? -geoff I would *certainly* not use ssh-tunnels, on a line that is not 100% error free or with high latency. In general tcp-in-tcp tunneling is BAD. One likely gets the infamous snowbal-effect. As ipsec is lower in the protocol-stack (then openvpn) it has probably the lowest overhead. ssh-tunnels are the worst (just nice for a quick tunnel in SOHO-environments) ______________________________________________________________________ Dit bericht kan informatie bevatten die niet voor u is bestemd. Indien u niet de geadresseerde bent of dit bericht abusievelijk aan u is toegezonden, wordt u verzocht dat aan de afzender te melden en het bericht te verwijderen. De Staat aanvaardt geen aansprakelijkheid voor schade, van welke aard ook, die verband houdt met risico's verbonden aan het elektronisch verzenden van berichten. This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. The State accepts no liability for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent in the electronic transmission of messages.
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
