Conceptual approach

gbuico

I'm very new to this forum... unfortunately (for me) not new in IT...
I've been reading a lot in the past days about OpenVPN and its many possible applications.
What I'm trying to implement is a very simple VPN between two LANs in two different locations (1500 km distant), both connected to internet.
I found many different examples and sample configurations that will help me to achieve my goal, but before starting I'd like to find the answer to a doubt related to the product design.
More specifically, what I see repeated in the examples I found, is that one of the two locations is always assumed to be "server" and the other "client" even though they are both described as equally important.
Assuming (and correct me if I'm wrong) that this the right and only way to follow, I couldn't find any explanation on how you decise to define a location "server" and which are the functionalities that you lose when you are on the client side.
In my scenario, I'm living and working alternatively in either of the two place while the other is totally unattended, so I'm very worried to have both sites with the same "authority".
Could someone be so kind and spend a couple of words on this conceptual (for me) issue?

brendan

no reason both sides could not be servers and clients.

Site A is a server to Site B, so Site B initiates connections to Site A when you are at Site B
Site B is a server to Site A, so Site A initiates connections to Site B when you are at Site A

a bit of a kludge, but it can be done. otherwise a site-to-site vpn, where either side of the tunnel can generate interesting traffic and bring up the tunnel, might be worth considering.

gbuico

brendan wroteno reason both sides could not be servers and clients.

Site A is a server to Site B, so Site B initiates connections to Site A when you are at Site B
Site B is a server to Site A, so Site A initiates connections to Site B when you are at Site A

a bit of a kludge, but it can be done. otherwise a site-to-site vpn, where either side of the tunnel can generate interesting traffic and bring up the tunnel, might be worth considering.

This sounds exactly what I'd like to achieve.
In both sites I have data servers, surveillance cameras, "telephony" equipments.
In turn, one of them is unattended so I think I shold prefere a solution where both sites are capable to initiate a connection with the other site.
Still... it might be that I'm making this thing too big, since, at the end, my goal is to have the VPN always available.
Possibly, even if the unattended site goes down then up (power or internet failure) it might be possible to automatically reactivate the VPN at restart.
Do you see any obstacle for this approach?

gbuico

I forgot to share an important detail.
When in one of the two location there is a need from time to time to use the internet access of the other location.
In few words, from time to time, location A, using its internet connection only as a VPN to location B, should use the internet connection of location B to surf the net.
Is this function suggesting location B as a server?