Re: Anyone using uvlan out there?

2007-09-14 Thread Carlos Friacas


On Fri, 14 Sep 2007, Matt Palmer wrote:



On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 07:35:26AM +1000, Steven Haigh wrote:


Phone: (03) 90001 6090 - 0412 935 897


Gee you Melbournians are advanced... you've already gone to 11 digit phone
numbers...  grin

- Matt



...it seems they are closer to the future ground-breaking 128-bit IP world 
than the rest. ;-)))


./Carlos


RE: Anyone using uvlan out there?

2007-09-14 Thread michael.dillon


 Using the libpcap (winpcap for windows users) library, uvlan 
 listens to a specific ethernet device. If a broadcast frame 
 is seen, then it is sent off to all the peers so they can add 
 it to their records and emit the broadcast on their local 
 network. 

I doubt that we will be deploying Windows servers in our network to
route traffic. This is not the only way to do layer 2 over IP. See
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3931.html

--Michael Dillon


Re: Anyone using uvlan out there?

2007-09-14 Thread Tim Franklin

On Fri, September 14, 2007 4:03 am, Matt Palmer wrote:
 XBox games don't work over a routed network?  Please tell me that XBox
 Live isn't just a giant uvlan install.

XBox Live is regular, routed IP, that doesn't even need to much work to
function from the wrong side of EvilConsumerBroadbandNAT.

I guess the point was talking about original non-360 Xbox games, some of
which supported 'LAN play' by hooking a lot of consoles together on the
same local network.  I have no idea what was sitting in the Ethernet
frames that wasn't routable.

Cheers,
Tim.




Re: Anyone using uvlan out there?

2007-09-14 Thread Adrian Chadd

On Fri, Sep 14, 2007, Tim Franklin wrote:
 
 On Fri, September 14, 2007 4:03 am, Matt Palmer wrote:
  XBox games don't work over a routed network?  Please tell me that XBox
  Live isn't just a giant uvlan install.
 
 XBox Live is regular, routed IP, that doesn't even need to much work to
 function from the wrong side of EvilConsumerBroadbandNAT.
 
 I guess the point was talking about original non-360 Xbox games, some of
 which supported 'LAN play' by hooking a lot of consoles together on the
 same local network.  I have no idea what was sitting in the Ethernet
 frames that wasn't routable.

Broadcast/multicast traffic? They probably expect the other Xboxes to be
on the same broadcast segment.

This brings back memories of KALI from yesteryear, when I was but a wee
lad with an E1 and a hankering for Duke Nuken 3D. Ah, those days..




adrian




Anyone using uvlan out there?

2007-09-13 Thread Steven Haigh


A few weeks ago, I stumbled across uvlan... I first thought WTF, then  
upon researching it a little more, I'm starting to really like the  
idea for replacing a traditional VPN between sites etc.


From the web site:
uvlan is a User-space Virtual Local Area Network. In other words,  
uvlan peers act as nodes on a network switch. Routing ethernet  
traffic between peers inteligently. Thus allowing for multiple  
networks to share resources and even IP address space. Some may call  
it a VPN (Virtual Private Network) application, but it's much more  
powerful. Differences with traditional VPN technology:


   1. It is peer-to-peer
   2. It doesn't require licensing
   3. It is much simpler
   4. It operates at Layer-2 (Ethernet), VPNs generally operate at  
Layer-3 (IP)
  Layer-2 applications like gaming can't be supported with  
Layer-3 tunneling.


How does it work?
Using the libpcap (winpcap for windows users) library, uvlan listens  
to a specific ethernet device. If a broadcast frame is seen, then it  
is sent off to all the peers so they can add it to their records and  
emit the broadcast on their local network. Once this happens, the  
device (computer, router, gaming console, etc) which sent the  
broadcast will be known by all the peers and remote machines will  
know of the device's existance and how to route traffic to it.


This behaviour is identical to a hardware switch. Only difference is  
- this switch is software and the backplane (the medium that passes  
information between switch ports) is encrypted packets on the internet.



From my understanding, this software is pretty much acting like a  
bridge, but with endpoints over a routed IP network.


Has anyone actually used this? Thoughts? Criticisms?

--
Steven Haigh

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: http://www.crc.id.au
Phone: (03) 90001 6090 - 0412 935 897




Re: Anyone using uvlan out there?

2007-09-13 Thread Deepak Jain



How does it work?
Using the libpcap (winpcap for windows users) library, uvlan listens to 
a specific ethernet device. If a broadcast frame is seen, then it is 
sent off to all the peers so they can add it to their records and emit 
the broadcast on their local network. Once this happens, the device 
(computer, router, gaming console, etc) which sent the broadcast will be 
known by all the peers and remote machines will know of the device's 
existance and how to route traffic to it.


I'd be very concerned if you had a lot of machines running on the same 
side of a hardware switch and all were nodes... they'd replicate all 
the broadcast frames and n^2 plus the hardware switch's contribution :). 
Sounds like a problem for machines that are reasonably close together 
and/or large implementations of these.


Kind of cool otherwise.

Deepak


Re: Anyone using uvlan out there?

2007-09-13 Thread Matt Palmer

On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 07:35:26AM +1000, Steven Haigh wrote:
 From the web site:
 uvlan is a User-space Virtual Local Area Network. In other words,  
 uvlan peers act as nodes on a network switch. Routing ethernet  
 traffic between peers inteligently. Thus allowing for multiple  
 networks to share resources and even IP address space. Some may call  
 it a VPN (Virtual Private Network) application, but it's much more  
 powerful. Differences with traditional VPN technology:

It's a VPN.  None of these supposed differences are different from the
fundamental characteristics of a VPN:

1. It is peer-to-peer

invoke_buzzword_of_the_month();

2. It doesn't require licensing

Plenty of VPN products out there are FOSS;

3. It is much simpler

Simpler than what?

4. It operates at Layer-2 (Ethernet), VPNs generally operate at  
 Layer-3 (IP)

Generally, perhaps, but it's not a requirement of the term VPN that it be
an L3 transition.

   Layer-2 applications like gaming can't be supported with  
 Layer-3 tunneling.

Plenty of games can successfully use IP.

 From my understanding, this software is pretty much acting like a  
 bridge, but with endpoints over a routed IP network.
 
 Has anyone actually used this? Thoughts? Criticisms?

I haven't used this particular software, but I've used OpenVPN (software of
the Gods, by gum) in it's L2 mode, and it's OK as long as you observe all of
the usual restrictions on LAN-like traffic over a low-bandwidth,
high-latency link.  Most things that need to use Ethernet assume all sorts
of things that just don't hold over the Internet, and it causes some painful
hassles.  But, engineered properly, in the correct circumstances, it can be
handy to bridge two or more segments over a routed network.

A criticism of uvlan in particular is that I wouldn't trust my network
security to people who sound so clueless.  Their derision of VPNs, as you
quoted above, shows either a lack of sense or a blind hatred, using libpcap
in this situation gave me some chuckles, and their What algorithms are
used? page scares me a little.  I'll stick with OpenVPN, myself.

 Phone: (03) 90001 6090 - 0412 935 897

Gee you Melbournians are advanced... you've already gone to 11 digit phone
numbers...  grin

- Matt


Re: Anyone using uvlan out there?

2007-09-13 Thread Steven Haigh


Quoting Matt Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 07:35:26AM +1000, Steven Haigh wrote:

From the web site:
uvlan is a User-space Virtual Local Area Network. In other words,
uvlan peers act as nodes on a network switch. Routing ethernet
traffic between peers inteligently. Thus allowing for multiple
networks to share resources and even IP address space. Some may call
it a VPN (Virtual Private Network) application, but it's much more
powerful. Differences with traditional VPN technology:


It's a VPN.  None of these supposed differences are different from the
fundamental characteristics of a VPN:


   1. It is peer-to-peer


invoke_buzzword_of_the_month();


Yeah - I don't quite agree with this in the traditional P2P sense,  
however I think they mean that they can connect multiple sites and  
have data transit between them. I'll cut them a break here because  
it's hard to describe how it works in so few words :)



   2. It doesn't require licensing


Plenty of VPN products out there are FOSS;


Yeah - I wasn't too sure about this either. I haven't seen any VPN  
software that requires licensing in years. I didn't know anyone still  
required this?



   3. It is much simpler


Simpler than what?


Routing?


   4. It operates at Layer-2 (Ethernet), VPNs generally operate at
Layer-3 (IP)


Generally, perhaps, but it's not a requirement of the term VPN that it be
an L3 transition.


  Layer-2 applications like gaming can't be supported with
Layer-3 tunneling.


Plenty of games can successfully use IP.


I was thinking more the case of joining lans. Obviously its not a  
solution for all causes, as anything with more than 5-10 nodes per  
site and more than 2-3 sites would get pretty ugly. I think a nice  
thing would be for things that can ONLY use a local LAN due to either  
software or developer restrictions.



From my understanding, this software is pretty much acting like a
bridge, but with endpoints over a routed IP network.

Has anyone actually used this? Thoughts? Criticisms?


I haven't used this particular software, but I've used OpenVPN (software of
the Gods, by gum) in it's L2 mode, and it's OK as long as you observe all of
the usual restrictions on LAN-like traffic over a low-bandwidth,
high-latency link.  Most things that need to use Ethernet assume all sorts
of things that just don't hold over the Internet, and it causes some painful
hassles.  But, engineered properly, in the correct circumstances, it can be
handy to bridge two or more segments over a routed network.


I've used a lot of VPN stuff in the past, but I've usually always  
ended up doing it on a router, then had to NAT over it and all sorts  
of nasty stuff. I think this is a nicer solution if it could be  
implemented right :)



A criticism of uvlan in particular is that I wouldn't trust my network
security to people who sound so clueless.  Their derision of VPNs, as you
quoted above, shows either a lack of sense or a blind hatred, using libpcap
in this situation gave me some chuckles, and their What algorithms are
used? page scares me a little.  I'll stick with OpenVPN, myself.


I think it's come about of a case of wanting to do stuff that won't  
work properly over a routed network (xbox games etc) - however could  
be nicer for a lot more things.



Phone: (03) 90001 6090 - 0412 935 897


Gee you Melbournians are advanced... you've already gone to 11 digit phone
numbers...  grin


Damn typos. I've just changed numbers, I must have typo'ed it when  
updating the sig on my desktop. At least it's right in other places ;)


--
Steven Haigh

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: http://www.crc.id.au
Phone: (03) 9001 6090 - 0412 935 897




Re: Anyone using uvlan out there?

2007-09-13 Thread Matt Palmer

On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 12:33:03PM +1000, Steven Haigh wrote:
 Quoting Matt Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 07:35:26AM +1000, Steven Haigh wrote:
2. It doesn't require licensing
 
 Plenty of VPN products out there are FOSS;
 
 Yeah - I wasn't too sure about this either. I haven't seen any VPN  
 software that requires licensing in years. I didn't know anyone still  
 required this?

There's plenty of lots-o-money VPN products out there; presumably that's
what they're talking about.  The problem is that the statement uvlan isn't
a VPN because it doesn't require licencing is a ridiculous statement,
because you don't have to have a licencing requirement to be a VPN.

3. It is much simpler
 
 Simpler than what?
 
 Routing?

Simple is in the eye of the beholder.  Switched ethernet networks have their
complexities that routed networks don't...

4. It operates at Layer-2 (Ethernet), VPNs generally operate at
 Layer-3 (IP)
 
 Generally, perhaps, but it's not a requirement of the term VPN that it be
 an L3 transition.
 
   Layer-2 applications like gaming can't be supported with
 Layer-3 tunneling.
 
 Plenty of games can successfully use IP.
 
 I was thinking more the case of joining lans. Obviously its not a  
 solution for all causes, as anything with more than 5-10 nodes per  
 site and more than 2-3 sites would get pretty ugly. I think a nice  
 thing would be for things that can ONLY use a local LAN due to either  
 software or developer restrictions.

Well, obviously.

 From my understanding, this software is pretty much acting like a
 bridge, but with endpoints over a routed IP network.
 
 Has anyone actually used this? Thoughts? Criticisms?
 
 I haven't used this particular software, but I've used OpenVPN (software of
 the Gods, by gum) in it's L2 mode, and it's OK as long as you observe all 
 of
 the usual restrictions on LAN-like traffic over a low-bandwidth,
 high-latency link.  Most things that need to use Ethernet assume all sorts
 of things that just don't hold over the Internet, and it causes some 
 painful
 hassles.  But, engineered properly, in the correct circumstances, it can be
 handy to bridge two or more segments over a routed network.
 
 I've used a lot of VPN stuff in the past, but I've usually always  
 ended up doing it on a router, then had to NAT over it and all sorts  
 of nasty stuff. I think this is a nicer solution if it could be  
 implemented right :)

I don't think you quite got my point -- you *don't* need uvlan to bridge
Ethernet segments over a routed network; there are other products which will
do the same thing.  As I said, I've used OpenVPN to do this job, and my
experiences are given in that block of text you quoted.

 A criticism of uvlan in particular is that I wouldn't trust my network
 security to people who sound so clueless.  Their derision of VPNs, as you
 quoted above, shows either a lack of sense or a blind hatred, using libpcap
 in this situation gave me some chuckles, and their What algorithms are
 used? page scares me a little.  I'll stick with OpenVPN, myself.
 
 I think it's come about of a case of wanting to do stuff that won't  
 work properly over a routed network (xbox games etc) - however could  
 be nicer for a lot more things.

XBox games don't work over a routed network?  Please tell me that XBox Live
isn't just a giant uvlan install.

- Matt

-- 
When the revolution comes, they won't be able to FIND the wall.
-- Brian Kantor, in the Monastery


Re: Anyone using uvlan out there?

2007-09-13 Thread Alex Pilosov

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007, Steven Haigh wrote:

  From my understanding, this software is pretty much acting like a
 bridge, but with endpoints over a routed IP network.
So its like l2tpv3 vpn. 

And, since its based on PC platform, I kind of have to say, in words of
Vijay, It does not scale, and What problem is being solved?

-alex [not mlc anything]