VPN question on performance

[acberger]

Being new at VPN, I would appreciate if you could answer the following questions:

Our company operates two small hotels and makes all reservation from a centralized location.

Right now, the way we process the reservations is through PcAnywhere sessions using broadband connections (ADSL at the centralized office and Cable at the hotels). At this moment, we need to increase the number of reservation agents, and with the pcAnywhere solution, we need to add computer stations at the hotels just to wait for conections.

Now, we want to see if building a VPN is the right choice.

My first question is:

Right now the hotel operates a Windows 2000 server with Windows 98 workstations.

The reservation software is not HTML based. It is a client-server TopSpeed for Windows database program installed only at the server. How will the performance of the connection be, compared to the PcAnywhere solution, since PcAnywhere only sends screen updates and keyboard commands thru the lines?

Are the speeds of Cable and ADSL enough? (the DSl gets about 412 down and 128 up, and the cable 1.5 down and 412 up)

Do you have any suggestions as far as the right VPN/Router/Gateway? I've been looking at Netopia, Netscreen and Linsys.

Thanks

 

[tiash]

You should consider using the treminal services on the W2K server. This is a thin client solution it will give you centralized admin. and allow better use of bandwidth. If you want control of application deployment you can add Citrix to the package, but Citrix is costly.

Your DSL is probably using a Flowpoint router that can be configured to do a vpn but you would have to put a router in for the cable. I've used netopia and linksys. I prefer the high end router like lucent and cisco , but the linksys are simple to configure if you want to save money. The netopia has more control with its configuration.

Your biggest vpn issue will be with your cable which gives a dynamic route instead of a static route. Ive posted answers to getting around this issue already.

 

[tiash]

To answer your question you will see a performance difference when you access the database through the tunnel compared to pc anywhere or a thin client.

a thin client uses about 20K of bandwidth.

 

[247admin]

I'm in the Thin Client Camp. Go with Win2k Terminal Services and you'll make best use of your bandwidth, plus you'll have the groundwork laid in case you decide to put Citrix on top.

I agree that this is best for lowest cost, centralized administration, simplicity and speed.