So, we do not need to worry about replication and redundancy explicitly. Here is the diagram of pcs active-active pairĪWS VPN is fully managed by AWS. Pulse Secure recommends High Availability through active-active cluster of multiple pcs instances with a Virtual Traffic Manager(a pulse product) as a load balancer Here is the document reference to achieve the same. But we can achieve HA on OpenVPN Access server using Route 53. However, this feature does not works with AWS. OpenVPN access server provides backup/standby nodes for failure and recovery. And each server can be attached to multiple hosts, so that if one of the hosts fail, the server can be started on another host. One pritunl host can run multiple instances of OpenVPN server. So, it is easy to have redundancy and handling failovers. And it can be connected through any pcs client software.Ĭlick here for admin guide Availability / Replicationĭistributed architecture is at the core of pritunl. A cloudFormation template could be used to provision a PCS instance in aws. Pulse secure simple implementation will be almost the same as openVPN. Site-to-Site Implementation of OpenVPN Access server.ĪWS implicitly supports both Site-to-Site vpn access and remote access vpn tunnels. These services are fully managed by AWS which means administrators need not worry about failures or high availability.īelow is an architecture diagram for a remote employee to connect to many VPCs.Ĭlick here for more information about aws client vpn endpoint Remote Access with OpenVPN Access Server. But the functionality does not works with AWS. It works as primary and secondary nodes as well (cluster with multiple instances), where in case of failure of primary node, secondary/standby node takes up.

OpenVPN works as a standalone OpenVPN access server running in the VPC. It uses mongodb as its database which can be installed on the same instance as well as on a managed instance in case we need a redundant vpn server. So, Pritunl can be easily scaled up based on the requirements. Pritunl works as a distributed and scalable infrastructure with no master server. Here we are defining the criteria for comparison:įollowing VPNs have qualified above criteria and has been compared throughly. Access control for 3rd Party apps: Connection can be established with 3rd party apps from VPN ip only and not directly.Įach VPN can handle the same feature but it may be in a different way.Access control: Ie, Certain users can access a certain set of hosts only.Site-to-site Implementation: Tunnelling between AWS VPC and a remote network, eg, connection between office network and VPC.Strong Encryption: Encrypted tunnel between VPN clients and VPC.Remote Access: Access Private network from any remote location and any Platform.Simplicity: Simple for admins to setup networks, users, SSO etc.Here are the things I kept in my mind before starting: Complete open-source VPNs are out of the scope. So, I decided to compare different offerings in the market. Or a proprietary VPN having a lot of simplicity and customisation can be best for a medium or high budget implementation.

An Open-source VPN covering all the basic functionalities can be best for a simple implementation. I recently got an assignment to get the best offering in the market. There are a number of VPN offerings in the market ranging from open-source to proprietary software, self-managed to VPN-as-a-service, and with a huge range of features. They are even used to mask your public IP, so that you can access a public server without getting traced. VPNs are a great way to securely connect your private networks.

Setting up pritunl dev