Pertino - Is Anyone Successfully Using Any Version Above 510 with DNS/AD Connect?
-
@scottalanmiller I was using the term loosely to describe my windows 8.1 workstation in my office. Where I can connect to using screen connect.
-
@scottalanmiller I understand that things have changed with the cradlepoint acquisition but the release of the gateway was prior to that.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller I wouldn't necessarily struggle with deploying traditional solutions. I didn't think I would struggle with Pertino LOL. It is SOOOO easy everyone said. My main concern is that I can't deploy it on certain devices like printers or items I want to access that also don't have the ability to run the client.
It is SOOO easy, when you deploy it as designed
Printers are an "issue" but outside of what we want to be location agnostic and if you need to get around that we have this new thing around the late 1980s called a printer server. So that's not a real issue today.
What other devices are causing problems?
Actually, that's not entirely true.
Scenerio - home user, needs to print from a RDS a Linux box in the DC.
I have a remote AS/400 user who had a check printing printer at home. They needed to be able to print checks to the home printer. Luckily I was able to open a print queue session on the PC, which worked because the PC was on the VPN.
I guess the same could be done here. The printer is setup to a PC, that PC shares it over the Pertino network, ta da - printing works... but management of the printer doesn't.
Doesn't it? I'm probably missing something. But if the printer is on a PC, and the PC has ZT, isn't the problem solved?
Managing the printer (connecting to it's web or SSH interface) couldn't be done via the ZT network - you'd have to connect to the PC in question, then mange it from there. Not a huge deal - but @wrx7m has already said he doesn't want to deal with a jump box - which I agree with you, is the right way to deal with those.
Ah, so was still a network printer. That's what I missed. Of course if you are running an AS/400 the wheels are about to come off the wagon and ZT isn't an option anyway.
I was simply talking about a single example.. you would replace AS/400 with Linux box - now how would you solve it? I'm guessing there is a way to make a print server on Windows that linux could talk to over the ZT network, yes?
As long as you have a print server, Windows and Linux all talk to each other.
Right, the question is - for a home worker, can they setup a print server on their windows machine that Linux can print to? I know Windows Server can, I don't know about Windows Clients. Windows Server can make LPR printers, can say, Windows 10?
And if not, now that home worker would have to setup a Linux box on their home network that is also on the ZT network to act as a print server. More gear to maintain.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller LOL - Semantics. The gateway product was "developed/engineered" for the purpose of allowing access to devices that did not have the actual client installed on them.
And it is very, very important to understand that none of us recommended the system you are discussing or saying that it was easy. I realize that the name is all Pertino, but the Pertino product we spoke of was designed and produced to be a fundamentally different product that how you are trying to use this. I would say that they can't even be considered the same product given the gaps in "intent".
Also, the DNS bug is a problem that prevents me from using it. period.
-
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller I understand that things have changed with the cradlepoint acquisition but the release of the gateway was prior to that.
When did the gateway come out? Those acquisitions are often years in the works, the release was likely related to the purchase. But regardless, internal changes led to the release. The product that we all described is a deploy everywhere solution without gateways as the Pertino founders and architects designed.
-
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller LOL - Semantics. The gateway product was "developed/engineered" for the purpose of allowing access to devices that did not have the actual client installed on them.
And it is very, very important to understand that none of us recommended the system you are discussing or saying that it was easy. I realize that the name is all Pertino, but the Pertino product we spoke of was designed and produced to be a fundamentally different product that how you are trying to use this. I would say that they can't even be considered the same product given the gaps in "intent".
Also, the DNS bug is a problem that prevents me from using it. period.
DNS bug? In ZT, Pertino or in the "use of" gateways?
-
The gateway, I assume, works fine and DNS works and they "work" as expected which means they do not work together in a transparent way.
-
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller I understand that things have changed with the cradlepoint acquisition but the release of the gateway was prior to that.
That may be so - but the point is the sale people are selling you something that you want - even though it's not really how their product is meant to work. It's like Dell doing a DPACK and then selling you a SAN for one VM host. Will it work - it should.
-
@scottalanmiller Well, I am saying prior to it being made public. I do see your point. In terms of when everyone else knew about it. I was dealing with pertino devs/engineers in trailing a year ago.
-
@scottalanmiller DNS bug is in Pertino because it prevents the dynamic updates of all host records on my DNS servers.
-
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller DNS bug is in Pertino because it prevents the dynamic updates of all host records on my DNS servers.
In the post 510 client? That would be a real bug, yes.
-
@scottalanmiller I haven't even gotten to a point where I can say that DNS does or does not work across the gateway because I can't even get any traffic to traverse the gateway. It gets there then stops.
-
In the years that we used Pertino, we never experienced a DNS or AD problem. Even without the AD Connector, it worked fine.
-
@scottalanmiller Right but you weren't using it when 520 came out.
-
-
Oh I had issues intermittently with Pertino.
Strange DNS resolution issues with websites for starters. Even 2015/2014.
-
So in summary-
Pertino 520+ builds break my DNS when installed on my DNS servers
Pertino gateway does not allow any pertino network traffic to pass through it in my experience. I have tried Ubuntu Server 14.04.3, Ubuntu Server 15.10 and CentOS 7 all with Pertino builds 510, 520, 526 and 528. -
Stick the summary at the top of the thread so it does not get lost
-
@Breffni-Potter said:
Stick the summary at the top of the thread so it does not get lost
It has been at the top of the thread. It is my OP.
-
Funny, someone at CradlePoint spiced up my post about Pertino being rubbish
Then they realised and took the spice up away.
