I have a ASA5505 at our data center in Burbank, CA and 3 ASAs at remote locations in other States. I have a server behind each ASA 5505 at each one of the remote locations and they are linked to the data center's ASA 5505 via a STS(Site-To-Site) VPN. We've been able to transmit large amount of data to those 3 locations via the tunnels during business hours(7_00am-6_00PM PST) and the throughput has been fine. However, we have a 4th location with a server sitting behind an ASA but not connected to the data center's ASA via a STS VPN.
The issue that is being reported is that the server that is sitting behind the ASA and connected to our data center's ASA(no STS VPN) has been experiencing high latency issues when trying to transfer large amount of data during business hours.
My question is- does the STS VPN create more efficient mechanism to transmit data between the two links?
Sorry if my description of the problem was unclear. I simply wanted to find out if transferring large files between two FTP servers in dispersed locations is more efficient via a site-to-site VPN tunnel or not?
Table of ContentsIntroductionVersion HistoryPossible Future
UpdatesDocuments PurposeNAT Operation in ASA 8.3+ SectionsRule Types
Network Object NATTwice NAT / Manual NATRule Types used per SectionNAT
Types used with Twice NAT / Manual NAT and Network Obje...
Table of Contents Introduction:This document describes details on how
NAT-T works. Background: ESP encrypts all critical information,
encapsulating the entire inner TCP/UDP datagram within an ESP header.
ESP is an IP protocol in the same sense that TCP an...