Advances, Systems and Applications
Table 3 Pros and cons of implementations of VPN over various topologies
Topology | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|
OSI Layer 2 | · Most appropriate for smaller networks. | · Because LAN broadcasts are propagated to all VPN clients, this topology doesn't scale well to LANs that have a larger amount of broadcast traffic. |
· Easy to configure. | ||
· VPN clients receive their network | · Doesn't scale well with larger numbers of concurrent VPN clients. | |
· properties from the same DHCP server as machines that are | ||
· Can only be used when the Access Server is connected to a LAN that provides DHCP services. | ||
· physically connected to the server-side LAN. | ||
· Works well with application-layer | · Should only be used when the Access Server has a fixed IP address on a private LAN. | |
· protocols that depend on LAN broadcast resolution. | ||
· Can tunnel non-IP protocols. | · Currently only works with Windows Clients | |
OSI Layer 3 | · More efficient and scalable. | · More complex to configure. |
· Greater control over IP and routing configuration. | · Doesn't work well with application-layer protocols that depend on broadcast resolution. | |
· Better fine-grained access control. |  | |
· Works on all client platforms that support OpenVPN. |  |