Pertino - Is Anyone Successfully Using Any Version Above 510 with DNS/AD Connect?
-
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.
-
I know the standards of different VPN tech, like IP-sec, SSL, etc.
-
Maybe we should start from the beginning.
What do you want these mobile users to access and connect to?
-
@wrx7m said:
I know this isn't traditional but it still piqued my interest. Has anyone heard of Pritunl?
Isn't it? Looks like hosted OpenVPN to me.
-
@Breffni-Potter I want the user to be able to connect to anything on my LAN that I want to give them access to. File server, shoretel, printers et al. I want for me to be able to get to anything I want, period.
-
@scottalanmiller Is hosted considered traditional? I didn't know.
-
@wrx7m said:
@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.
Even the Windows world PPTP was the "legacy" way with Windows 2000.
-
@scottalanmiller I completely understand that. I have been trying to get rid of it for awhile. It was here when I got here.
Edit: hence the term "God-forsaken"
-
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller Is hosted considered traditional? I didn't know.
Hosted isn't related to traditional. You don't host a Windows server and call it "something different." Hosted just means someone else running it for you so that you don't have to run it yourself. OpenVPN is OpenVPN, outsourcing the management isn't weird.
-
@scottalanmiller I gotcha. I meant in terms of the topology being, I have an appliance or server onsite that acts as a gateway for the connection of remote clients to access the LAN.
