>From: Michael Nelson <mikenel @
>Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:29:03 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: Re: Microsoft's RAS
>On Fri, 17 Nov 1995, LASD DSB wrote:
>> My organization is in the process of implmenting remote access
>> capabilities via analog lines. Our firewall product has the capability
>> of establishing encrypted communication from the firewall to remote PC's
>> via an encryption add-on for each remote PC. As I was leaning to take
>> this route, someone mentioned that Microsoft's Remote Access Server
>> (RAS) basically provides the same functionality. Naturally, with RAS,
>> we would still have the firewall but we would let RAS handle the
>> encryption. Does anybody have any knowledge or experience of how RAS
>> works and whether there would be an advantage of going with RAS rather
>> than using the firewall's encryption package (other than $$$). The only
>> thing that comes to my mind is that now we would have to place a RAS
>> server outside of the firewall in order to un-encrypt the packets coming
>> in so that they may be processed through the firewall and routed through
>> our Cisco infrastructure.
>RAS doesn't encrypt data.
>- -- Mike
"RAS doesn't encrypt data"
What is this opinion based upon? I see encryption as an option to be checked off in my RAS phone book. This is in NT 3.51.