[strongSwan] Question regarding site-to-site multiple tunnel setup.

[Scott Walker]

Fast.... I know not a wonderful answer.

The more throughput we can get the better. Right now I am pushing 440-470
Mbit/s thru 1 tunnel. Ideally I'd like to get 3-4 tunnels up.

The other end of the tunnel is going to ~200 compute nodes pulling/pushing
data.

I'm just not sure on the specifics of multiple tunnels ummm bonded? (do you
even bond them?)

On 11 January 2017 at 20:55, Eric Germann <ekgermann at semperen.com> wrote:

> What kind of throughput are you looking for?
>
> AES-GCM with HW that supports AESNI, we routinely get 300+Mbps
>
> EKG
>
> > On Jan 11, 2017, at 4:48 PM, Scott Walker <scott.walker at framestore.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I'm looking to build an infra that is
> >
> >
> > local site -> remote site
> >
> > But using multiple tunnels in order to get the B/W I need. (plenty of
> servers at the remote end talking back so I want to be sure it's not all
> rammed down one tunnel).
> >
> > Most of the docs I'm finding revolve around this type of config but for
> VPC (AWS, GCE, etc).
> >
> > I do admit I'm a bit lost right now as to how I go about this approach.
> >
> > So if I have say 3-4 servers on local site and 3-4 servers on remote
> dedicated as VPN end points.
> >
> > Would I configure a 1-1 ratio? Create a mesh? How on local would I do
> routing? I'm not looking for HA this is for PURE speed reasons.
> >
> > I'm reading everything I can find but I'm still in the dark.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Users mailing list
> > Users at lists.strongswan.org
> > https://lists.strongswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.strongswan.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20170116/b442e24e/attachment.html>