ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all

    IT Discussion
    edgerouter edgerouter 4 colocation it support vpn zerotier
    7
    82
    5.3k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • FATeknollogeeF
      FATeknollogee @dafyre
      last edited by

      @dafyre said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

      I'm up to 3 sites for the moment. Once of them goes away in about 2 weeks.

      I connect them all via ZeroTier.

      How's the speeds between sites?

      dafyreD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • FATeknollogeeF
        FATeknollogee @dafyre
        last edited by

        @dafyre said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

        I'm up to 3 sites for the moment. Once of them goes away in about 2 weeks.

        I connect them all via ZeroTier.

        This is you: https://mangolassi.it/topic/19493/zerotier-site-to-site
        How has it worked out so far?

        dafyreD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • 1
          1337 @JaredBusch
          last edited by

          @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

          @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

          @Aaron-Studer said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

          @FATeknollogee

          https://blog.kruyt.org/zerotier-on-a-ubiquiti-edgerouter/

          My question is why? Why setup ZT instead of site to site on all the devices?

          I suppose one answer could be, because it's just a single setup, instead of 5 setups.

          WTF?

          FFS, the question is about connecting multiple colo's. Do you only have one thing in each colo? Most don't. The OP specifically mentioned multiple thigns.

          You smokin?

          "The co-lo has all the gear (servers, voip, apps, file shares etc).
          You have 5 (or more) sites that "connect" to the co-lo."

          DashrenderD JaredBuschJ 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • DashrenderD
            Dashrender @1337
            last edited by

            @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

            @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

            @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

            @Aaron-Studer said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

            @FATeknollogee

            https://blog.kruyt.org/zerotier-on-a-ubiquiti-edgerouter/

            My question is why? Why setup ZT instead of site to site on all the devices?

            I suppose one answer could be, because it's just a single setup, instead of 5 setups.

            WTF?

            FFS, the question is about connecting multiple colo's. Do you only have one thing in each colo? Most don't. The OP specifically mentioned multiple thigns.

            You smokin?

            "The co-lo has all the gear (servers, voip, apps, file shares etc).
            You have 5 (or more) sites that "connect" to the co-lo."

            What we aren't told - is there a firewall in front of all of that stuff at the co-lo, or is it all directly on the internet? Then the OP asks - can ZT be installed on ER? I'll admit I was assuming an ER at each location, and at the co-lo in front of all of that gear.

            FATeknollogeeF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • JaredBuschJ
              JaredBusch @1337
              last edited by

              @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

              @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

              @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

              @Aaron-Studer said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

              @FATeknollogee

              https://blog.kruyt.org/zerotier-on-a-ubiquiti-edgerouter/

              My question is why? Why setup ZT instead of site to site on all the devices?

              I suppose one answer could be, because it's just a single setup, instead of 5 setups.

              WTF?

              FFS, the question is about connecting multiple colo's. Do you only have one thing in each colo? Most don't. The OP specifically mentioned multiple thigns.

              You smokin?

              Totally.

              "The co-lo has all the gear (servers, voip, apps, file shares etc).
              You have 5 (or more) sites that "connect" to the co-lo."

              But the point was valid even if I used the wrong terms Multiple sites with multiple things. not singe server point to point like @Dashrender said.

              FATeknollogeeF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • FATeknollogeeF
                FATeknollogee @Dashrender
                last edited by

                @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                @Aaron-Studer said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                @FATeknollogee

                https://blog.kruyt.org/zerotier-on-a-ubiquiti-edgerouter/

                My question is why? Why setup ZT instead of site to site on all the devices?

                I suppose one answer could be, because it's just a single setup, instead of 5 setups.

                WTF?

                FFS, the question is about connecting multiple colo's. Do you only have one thing in each colo? Most don't. The OP specifically mentioned multiple thigns.

                You smokin?

                "The co-lo has all the gear (servers, voip, apps, file shares etc).
                You have 5 (or more) sites that "connect" to the co-lo."

                What we aren't told - is there a firewall in front of all of that stuff at the co-lo, or is it all directly on the internet? Then the OP asks - can ZT be installed on ER? I'll admit I was assuming an ER at each location, and at the co-lo in front of all of that gear.

                Yes, the plan is an ER in front at all locations (that plan isn't set in stone)

                scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • FATeknollogeeF
                  FATeknollogee @JaredBusch
                  last edited by

                  @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                  @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                  @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                  @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                  @Aaron-Studer said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                  @FATeknollogee

                  https://blog.kruyt.org/zerotier-on-a-ubiquiti-edgerouter/

                  My question is why? Why setup ZT instead of site to site on all the devices?

                  I suppose one answer could be, because it's just a single setup, instead of 5 setups.

                  WTF?

                  FFS, the question is about connecting multiple colo's. Do you only have one thing in each colo? Most don't. The OP specifically mentioned multiple thigns.

                  You smokin?

                  Totally.

                  "The co-lo has all the gear (servers, voip, apps, file shares etc).
                  You have 5 (or more) sites that "connect" to the co-lo."

                  But the point was valid even if I used the wrong terms Multiple sites with multiple things. not singe server point to point like @Dashrender said.

                  Correct, multiple sites, multiple things.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • scottalanmillerS
                    scottalanmiller @FATeknollogee
                    last edited by

                    @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                    @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                    @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                    @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                    @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                    @Aaron-Studer said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                    @FATeknollogee

                    https://blog.kruyt.org/zerotier-on-a-ubiquiti-edgerouter/

                    My question is why? Why setup ZT instead of site to site on all the devices?

                    I suppose one answer could be, because it's just a single setup, instead of 5 setups.

                    WTF?

                    FFS, the question is about connecting multiple colo's. Do you only have one thing in each colo? Most don't. The OP specifically mentioned multiple thigns.

                    You smokin?

                    "The co-lo has all the gear (servers, voip, apps, file shares etc).
                    You have 5 (or more) sites that "connect" to the co-lo."

                    What we aren't told - is there a firewall in front of all of that stuff at the co-lo, or is it all directly on the internet? Then the OP asks - can ZT be installed on ER? I'll admit I was assuming an ER at each location, and at the co-lo in front of all of that gear.

                    Yes, the plan is an ER in front at all locations (that plan isn't set in stone)

                    We did this for a company from their colo but NOT with ZT, ERs using their native, much faster IPSec.

                    FATeknollogeeF DashrenderD 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • FATeknollogeeF
                      FATeknollogee @scottalanmiller
                      last edited by

                      @scottalanmiller said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                      @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                      @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                      @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                      @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                      @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                      @Aaron-Studer said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                      @FATeknollogee

                      https://blog.kruyt.org/zerotier-on-a-ubiquiti-edgerouter/

                      My question is why? Why setup ZT instead of site to site on all the devices?

                      I suppose one answer could be, because it's just a single setup, instead of 5 setups.

                      WTF?

                      FFS, the question is about connecting multiple colo's. Do you only have one thing in each colo? Most don't. The OP specifically mentioned multiple thigns.

                      You smokin?

                      "The co-lo has all the gear (servers, voip, apps, file shares etc).
                      You have 5 (or more) sites that "connect" to the co-lo."

                      What we aren't told - is there a firewall in front of all of that stuff at the co-lo, or is it all directly on the internet? Then the OP asks - can ZT be installed on ER? I'll admit I was assuming an ER at each location, and at the co-lo in front of all of that gear.

                      Yes, the plan is an ER in front at all locations (that plan isn't set in stone)

                      We did this for a company from their colo but NOT with ZT, ERs using their native, much faster IPSec.

                      Did you use Route based VPN?
                      https://help.ubnt.com/hc/en-us/articles/115011377588-EdgeRouter-IPsec-Route-Based-VTI-Site-to-Site-VPN

                      JaredBuschJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • JaredBuschJ
                        JaredBusch @FATeknollogee
                        last edited by

                        @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                        @scottalanmiller said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                        @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                        @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                        @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                        @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                        @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                        @Aaron-Studer said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                        @FATeknollogee

                        https://blog.kruyt.org/zerotier-on-a-ubiquiti-edgerouter/

                        My question is why? Why setup ZT instead of site to site on all the devices?

                        I suppose one answer could be, because it's just a single setup, instead of 5 setups.

                        WTF?

                        FFS, the question is about connecting multiple colo's. Do you only have one thing in each colo? Most don't. The OP specifically mentioned multiple thigns.

                        You smokin?

                        "The co-lo has all the gear (servers, voip, apps, file shares etc).
                        You have 5 (or more) sites that "connect" to the co-lo."

                        What we aren't told - is there a firewall in front of all of that stuff at the co-lo, or is it all directly on the internet? Then the OP asks - can ZT be installed on ER? I'll admit I was assuming an ER at each location, and at the co-lo in front of all of that gear.

                        Yes, the plan is an ER in front at all locations (that plan isn't set in stone)

                        We did this for a company from their colo but NOT with ZT, ERs using their native, much faster IPSec.

                        Did you use Route based VPN?
                        https://help.ubnt.com/hc/en-us/articles/115011377588-EdgeRouter-IPsec-Route-Based-VTI-Site-to-Site-VPN

                        I've done both. No idea on speed difference. never ran in to router limits with both methods.

                        FATeknollogeeF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • FATeknollogeeF
                          FATeknollogee @JaredBusch
                          last edited by

                          @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                          @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                          @scottalanmiller said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                          @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                          @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                          @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                          @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                          @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                          @Aaron-Studer said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                          @FATeknollogee

                          https://blog.kruyt.org/zerotier-on-a-ubiquiti-edgerouter/

                          My question is why? Why setup ZT instead of site to site on all the devices?

                          I suppose one answer could be, because it's just a single setup, instead of 5 setups.

                          WTF?

                          FFS, the question is about connecting multiple colo's. Do you only have one thing in each colo? Most don't. The OP specifically mentioned multiple thigns.

                          You smokin?

                          "The co-lo has all the gear (servers, voip, apps, file shares etc).
                          You have 5 (or more) sites that "connect" to the co-lo."

                          What we aren't told - is there a firewall in front of all of that stuff at the co-lo, or is it all directly on the internet? Then the OP asks - can ZT be installed on ER? I'll admit I was assuming an ER at each location, and at the co-lo in front of all of that gear.

                          Yes, the plan is an ER in front at all locations (that plan isn't set in stone)

                          We did this for a company from their colo but NOT with ZT, ERs using their native, much faster IPSec.

                          Did you use Route based VPN?
                          https://help.ubnt.com/hc/en-us/articles/115011377588-EdgeRouter-IPsec-Route-Based-VTI-Site-to-Site-VPN

                          I've done both. No idea on speed difference. never ran in to router limits with both methods.

                          Ease of setup/ability to add more sites, one method vs the other?

                          DashrenderD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • dafyreD
                            dafyre @FATeknollogee
                            last edited by

                            @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                            @dafyre said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                            I'm up to 3 sites for the moment. Once of them goes away in about 2 weeks.

                            I connect them all via ZeroTier.

                            How's the speeds between sites?

                            Speeds were good. I don't remember what they were, but I transferred 1TB of stuff over ZT without any issues.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • dafyreD
                              dafyre @FATeknollogee
                              last edited by

                              @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                              @dafyre said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                              I'm up to 3 sites for the moment. Once of them goes away in about 2 weeks.

                              I connect them all via ZeroTier.

                              This is you: https://mangolassi.it/topic/19493/zerotier-site-to-site
                              How has it worked out so far?

                              Yeah, that's me, and it's been great. I haven't had any problems with it at all.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • DashrenderD
                                Dashrender @scottalanmiller
                                last edited by

                                @scottalanmiller said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                @Aaron-Studer said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                @FATeknollogee

                                https://blog.kruyt.org/zerotier-on-a-ubiquiti-edgerouter/

                                My question is why? Why setup ZT instead of site to site on all the devices?

                                I suppose one answer could be, because it's just a single setup, instead of 5 setups.

                                WTF?

                                FFS, the question is about connecting multiple colo's. Do you only have one thing in each colo? Most don't. The OP specifically mentioned multiple thigns.

                                You smokin?

                                "The co-lo has all the gear (servers, voip, apps, file shares etc).
                                You have 5 (or more) sites that "connect" to the co-lo."

                                What we aren't told - is there a firewall in front of all of that stuff at the co-lo, or is it all directly on the internet? Then the OP asks - can ZT be installed on ER? I'll admit I was assuming an ER at each location, and at the co-lo in front of all of that gear.

                                Yes, the plan is an ER in front at all locations (that plan isn't set in stone)

                                We did this for a company from their colo but NOT with ZT, ERs using their native, much faster IPSec.

                                Which is what i was mentioning up top.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • DashrenderD
                                  Dashrender @FATeknollogee
                                  last edited by

                                  @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                  @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                  @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                  @scottalanmiller said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                  @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                  @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                  @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                  @JaredBusch said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                  @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                  @Aaron-Studer said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                  @FATeknollogee

                                  https://blog.kruyt.org/zerotier-on-a-ubiquiti-edgerouter/

                                  My question is why? Why setup ZT instead of site to site on all the devices?

                                  I suppose one answer could be, because it's just a single setup, instead of 5 setups.

                                  WTF?

                                  FFS, the question is about connecting multiple colo's. Do you only have one thing in each colo? Most don't. The OP specifically mentioned multiple thigns.

                                  You smokin?

                                  "The co-lo has all the gear (servers, voip, apps, file shares etc).
                                  You have 5 (or more) sites that "connect" to the co-lo."

                                  What we aren't told - is there a firewall in front of all of that stuff at the co-lo, or is it all directly on the internet? Then the OP asks - can ZT be installed on ER? I'll admit I was assuming an ER at each location, and at the co-lo in front of all of that gear.

                                  Yes, the plan is an ER in front at all locations (that plan isn't set in stone)

                                  We did this for a company from their colo but NOT with ZT, ERs using their native, much faster IPSec.

                                  Did you use Route based VPN?
                                  https://help.ubnt.com/hc/en-us/articles/115011377588-EdgeRouter-IPsec-Route-Based-VTI-Site-to-Site-VPN

                                  I've done both. No idea on speed difference. never ran in to router limits with both methods.

                                  Ease of setup/ability to add more sites, one method vs the other?

                                  Well, once you have ZT setup, adding another site is likely the easiest. You just add ZT on a new ER, join the mesh and you're done.

                                  With site to site VPN, you'd have to build the tunnel on both ER's (the co-lo and the new site). Not that this is hard, just possible a tiny more amount of work.

                                  FATeknollogeeF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • FATeknollogeeF
                                    FATeknollogee @Dashrender
                                    last edited by

                                    @Dashrender said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                    Well, once you have ZT setup, adding another site is likely the easiest. You just add ZT on a new ER, join the mesh and you're done.

                                    Who has done this ZT on ER install?
                                    The previous blog post seems to imply heavy/high CPU usage, wondering how this would affect performance?

                                    scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • scottalanmillerS
                                      scottalanmiller @FATeknollogee
                                      last edited by

                                      @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                      The previous blog post seems to imply heavy/high CPU usage, wondering how this would affect performance?

                                      We'd expect a bit. OpenVPN does as it is. SSL VPNs take a toll on performance.

                                      1 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • 1
                                        1337 @scottalanmiller
                                        last edited by 1337

                                        @scottalanmiller said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                        @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                        The previous blog post seems to imply heavy/high CPU usage, wondering how this would affect performance?

                                        We'd expect a bit. OpenVPN does as it is. SSL VPNs take a toll on performance.

                                        It's not OpenVPN that takes a toll on performance. If you look at the actual overhead on the packets it's very small.

                                        But it's the fact that small routers have very weak CPUs but they can off load straight IPsec, when you are not doing packet inspection or anything that requires the CPU. However they can't off load OpenVPN.

                                        If you look at more powerful CPUs, like Intel, you can off load OpenVPN with the AES-NI extensions in the CPU. So OpenVPN barely makes a dent on the CPU if you run it over a WAN link.

                                        1 FATeknollogeeF 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • 1
                                          1337 @1337
                                          last edited by

                                          @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                          @scottalanmiller said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                          @FATeknollogee said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                          The previous blog post seems to imply heavy/high CPU usage, wondering how this would affect performance?

                                          We'd expect a bit. OpenVPN does as it is. SSL VPNs take a toll on performance.

                                          It's not OpenVPN that takes a toll on performance. If you look at the actual overhead on the packets it's very small.

                                          But it's the fact that small routers have very weak CPUs but they can off load straight IPsec, when you are not doing packet inspection or anything that requires the CPU. However they can't off load OpenVPN.

                                          If you look at more powerful CPUs, like Intel, you can off load OpenVPN with the AES-NI extensions in the CPU. So OpenVPN barely makes a dent on the CPU if you run it over a WAN link.

                                          PS. So high CPU is not linked to the protocol but to what the router support for hardware off load.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • FATeknollogeeF
                                            FATeknollogee @1337
                                            last edited by

                                            @Pete-S said in Co-lo + 5 (or more) sites....connect 'em all:

                                            But it's the fact that small routers have very weak CPUs but they can off load straight IPsec, when you are not doing packet inspection or anything that requires the CPU. However they can't off load OpenVPN.

                                            Sounds like the choice should def be IPSec for less of a performance hit?

                                            1 scottalanmillerS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 3
                                            • 4
                                            • 5
                                            • 1 / 5
                                            • First post
                                              Last post