Talk:Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol

message: Thought that a section on these would be useful. Unfortunately, I forgot to sign in, so it's not attributed to me. If you have questions, my username follows. If anyone has a nice picture of the full encapsulation (IP-ESP-UDP-PPP-L2TP-Private IP-TCP/UDP-Data), it would help understanding. Scorpiuss 17:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't PPP follow L2TP? Iglam 01:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: L2TP/IPSec

message: Is it common to establish L2TP-tunnel over a completely insecure channel, i. e. IP without IPsec over it? I just wonder whether SOHO routers really implement IPsec when connecting to ISP in L2TP mode. At least, they don't support MPPE encryption for PPPoE and PPTP tunnels (for performance reasons, I suppose), so it's very doubtful that they will do IPsec encryption, even the most simple one, 3DES. Moreover, the throughput in L2TP mode can be in fact higher than in PPPoE / PPTP modes, which can be a direct indication of cryptographical absence. 213.234.235.82 (talk) 13:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: L2TP/IP ?

message: The section on the Windows L2TP implementation seems to be a reworked copy of the "IPsec without L2TP" section of this document here: http://www.jacco2.dds.nl/networking/vista-openswan.html.  As such it is describing raw IpSec-RA or IpSec-L2L, (not "L2TP without IPsec") which has absolutely nothing to do, of course, with L2TP.  (140.232.0.70 (talk) 14:33, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section on Windows implementation is just wrong 

message: I am planning to rename this page to "Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol", as this is the correct title. Any comments? Web-Crawling Stickler 18:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming page for better accuracy 

message: The page reads:
The help info does say that IPsec without L2TP is not to be used for Road Warrior-style VPNs. They advise to use L2TP/IPsec or PPTP for that.
What on earth is a Road Warrior-style VPN?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.74.218.162 (talk) 22:11, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Road Warrior-style? 

message: This edit added contents taken from IBM's Infocenter and is therefore removed:
*http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/iseries/v5r3/topic/rzaiy/rzaiyl2tpsupport.htm
*http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/iseries/v5r3/topic/rzaiy/rzaiyvoltunnel.htm
*http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/iseries/v5r3/topic/rzaiy/rzaiycomptic.htm
*http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/iseries/v5r3/topic/rzaiy/rzaiycomptrd.htm
*http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/iseries/v5r3/topic/rzaiy/rzaiymultihop.htm
Fontoponto (talk) 06:58, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed contents copied from IBM Infocenter

message: This article says that PPTP is from US Robotics, while PPTP says it's from Microsoft, 3Com, and others.
Which is correct? --MathsPoetry (talk) 07:59, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  USRobotics? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090127060833/http://cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0t/12_0t1/feature/guide/l2tpT.html to http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0t/12_0t1/feature/guide/l2tpT.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041207084942/http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/l2tpext-charter.html to http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/l2tpext-charter.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:33, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: So the statement in the lead paragraph that "it provides a tunnel for Layer 2" is confusing because it is wrong. Layer 3 is a tunnel for layer 2: layer 2 is a tunnel for layer 1: layer 1 is a point to point protocol.  Let's think of some other ways of saying it correctly: "The protocol provides a layer 2 tunnel" , "The protocol provides a tunnel through which layer 1 is passed"
Internet Protocol is not a provider for IP packets. TCP is not a provider for Transmission Control Packets. The Layer 2 protocol isn't a "provider" for layer 2: it's a 'protocol' for layer 2: it's a "provider" for layer 1 and/or layer 3.  
 ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean–neither more nor less.’, and that's Wikipedia editing. But for Wikipedia readers it's helpful if we stick to the common meaning of words and terms. 1.159.36.184 (talk) 10:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Layer 2 tunnelling protocol provides a layer 2 tunnel through which layer 1 is passed.