Talk:VoIP VPN

Spam
The "Commercial Implementation" section appears to be an advertisement of Patton Electronics, added by the company itself. There have been commercial VPN products with VoIP support since the early 2000's by the major networking equipment manufacturers. I see no justification for including Patton in the article and therefore I'm removing any references to them and reverting sections back to the version by User:Kaokaousa.

This article still needs some serious work, or should be removed completely. --Teemuk 10:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I see the mention of Patton Electronics has once again been added to the page (most likely by the company itself). As I stated before, Patton Electronics is not significant enough in this field to warrant a mention in the article (the article about the company itself was previously deleted, and has since been added again by the same user modifying this page). Therefore I am once again removing the section. If you feel that Patton Electronics should be included in this article, please justify your position before adding it again.--Teemuk 11:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Security
The free implementation section mentioned PPTP as a VPN protocol. Today's (widely known!) state of the art is that PPTP based VPNs can be broken within minutes, so I replaced that recommendation with a recommendation to use IPSEC which does not have such problems. I also added the BSD stuff because they are similarly capable than is Linux in this area, and imho generally better for Joe Average User, security-wise.

No references
not encyclopedic ==

There is not a single reference in this article. It doesn't look encyclopedic to me. It also uses some weasel words. 216.228.21.194 (talk) 19:40, 29 July 2009 (UTC)