Pertino - Is Anyone Successfully Using Any Version Above 510 with DNS/AD Connect?
-
@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.
-
Anyone have experience with privatetunnel?
https://www.privatetunnel.com/home/
Edit - Looks like top tier is 10 devices. NM, if that is the case.
-
For what you want, why not use a traditional VPN?
-
@scottalanmiller I was asking for suggestions on traditional VPN several posts up but everyone kept telling me to use ZT LOL. For a "traditional" VPN, do you have suggestions? I like the connection/client running as a service feature of pertino and ZT that enables to run prior to user login.
-
I have a webex with Pertino tomorrow to discuss my issues with the engineers. We will see how that goes. I am still interested in traditional VPN suggestions.
-
I know this isn't traditional but it still piqued my interest. Has anyone heard of Pritunl?
-
Traditional VPN.
Buy hardware devices at each location for IP_SEC gateway connectivity.
Windows client VPN device to server.
-
@Breffni-Potter I understand what traditional VPN is. I want to know if someone has a recommendation as to which "brand" is good and/or which to avoid.
-
Brand of what though.
I'm confused by what you are looking for
You can go soft clients to a server ala Windows or hardware boxes. -
@Breffni-Potter Right now I have Windows Server 2008 R2 with a God-forsaken PPTP connection. I am open to an appliance- virtual or physical.
-
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller I was asking for suggestions on traditional VPN several posts up but everyone kept telling me to use ZT LOL. For a "traditional" VPN, do you have suggestions? I like the connection/client running as a service feature of pertino and ZT that enables to run prior to user login.
Yes, but we always mean "use it as intended." Given that you don't want to use what we were recommending (it's assumed when we say ZT that we mean "on every device") then why not a traditional VPN?
Normal VPNs do run that way, that's totally standard. Not every one, but it's been standard for decades. Probably with the first VPN ever. OpenVPN, for example, does that.
