Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

X-Bone - IP Overlay for Automated VPN Deployment

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the make-it-for-all dept.

DarkSword writes "The X-Bone system for automated deployment of VPN / overlay networks is now publicly available. This is the first major public release, v1.2. X-Bone dynamically deploys and manages Internet overlays to reduce configuration effort and increase network component sharing. X-Bone discovers, configures, and monitors network resources to create overlays over existing IP networks. It's available for both Linux and BSD."

4 of 33 comments (clear)

  1. Could be interesting by jd · · Score: 2
    At present, we have LOTS of protocols for doing LOTS of different types of tunneling. Sometimes, we've lots of protocols for doing the =SAME= kinds of tunneling.

    HOW many VPN packages are there on Freshmeat? More than any person could imagine using. That they are 100% incompatiable, because they're all implementing VPN in a different way, merely makes it all the more annoying.

    Then, there's the assorted approaches to IPSec, IP6-in-IP4 (note that IP4-in-IP6, an essential format for a half-migrated network, does not exist), multicasting (plenty of choice, there!), routing (eeep!), etc.

    Yes, I can see the case that it's better to have lots of packages that do one thing each, really well, than one package that does lots of things very badly. However, when it comes to a protocol, that argument doesn't fly. The object is to get the payload from A to B, with minimum fuss. The information required to carry out that process is not overly well-defined, and each method requires different information, but there's a lot that IS the same and anything else can be bundled up in it's own packet.

    I don't know how X-Bone works, but the idea of an IP(any)-over-IP(any) VPN system with automatic detection andsemi-automatic configuration sounds a very attractive deal to me.

    Personally, I think it would be much nicer to have an (any-protocol)-over-(any-protocol) VPN system, with multi-ended tunnels. To me, THAT would be the ideal. Then, you could layer over any network, regardless of underlying architecture.

    As for those complaining about the name, the other two semi-mainstream backbones are named the Multi-Bone and the 6-Bone. If you want to complain about the X-Bone, why not poke fun at those, too, whilst you're at it? Or do you just enjoy messing with groups smaller than your IQ?

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  2. Re:X-bone? by FreeUser · · Score: 2

    couldn't they have come up with something different? How do I recommend something called X-bone to a PHB?

    I rather like the name. It stands a very good chance of further emberasing the censorware crowd. As for recommending it to a PHB, simply pronounce it as "cross"bone rather than "ex-bone." After all, that is clearly what the X is refering to (as in "Railroad X-ing", etc.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  3. Use Under 18 Not Permitted by FascDot+Killed+My+Pr · · Score: 2

    Am I the only one who thinks that you should call a internet-related product "x-bone"? That has censorware-bait written ALL over it.
    --

    --
    Linux MAPI Server!
    http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
    (Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
  4. Excellent news by chazR · · Score: 2

    VPNs are going to be incredibly important. The flexibility it gives is astonishing. Unfortunately, they haven't been very well implemented yet. Even Cisco have had 'issues' with them. One of the major complexities is designing and implementing good overlays

    I don't know how good X-bone is, but if it helps with overlay management it deserves to be successful.

    I'm off to check it out now.