[Deal]

Can somebody who upgraded to 10.3.9 who also uses Cisco VPN test it and let us know if it still works.

I am assuming Apple released this update for a smoother Tiger update. I was told that the Cisco VPN client did not work under Tiger and I am worried that the interim update might also break the Cisco VPN client.

I can't update to anything that breaks my connection to work

Thanks for the help.

Deal

[watcher]

Well, i can't comment on the Cisco VPN client, but i can tell you that the 10.3.9 update 'broke' the Checkpoint Securemote NG client, so i think you're very wise to wait............

[legacyb4]

Whoops, spoke too soon. I updated my desktop to 10.3.9 but not the laptop which has the VPN client... will test as soon as I can make a backup of my laptop.

-

Works fine here for me.

OS X 10.3.9
Cisco VPN Client 4.0.3

Cisco PIX Firewall Version 6.3(3)117
Cisco PIX Device Manager Version 3.0(2)

If anything, the bloody Java update from last week broke PDM access and I'm having to resort to using a stock install of Windows 2000 over VPC to get access to it.

[CaseCom]

Cisco VPN Client (version 4.0.1 A) working normally here on Mac OS X 10.3.9.

[Kristoff]

Wfm....4.6.00 (0045)

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Deal

Can somebody who upgraded to 10.3.9 who also uses Cisco VPN test it and let us know if it still works.

I am assuming Apple released this update for a smoother Tiger update. I was told that the Cisco VPN client did not work under Tiger and I am worried that the interim update might also break the Cisco VPN client.

I use the VPN Client on a daily basis, and I'm as frustrated as you about the Tiger problems, but 10.3.9 works fine for me.

[Kristoff]

Does anyone have official word when Cisco will release a Tiger compatible client?

[wuzup101]

Currently surfing wirelessly at my school using Cisco VPN client version 4.0.3 (E), works fine for me under 10.3.9...

However, I'm a bit pissed about the tiger thing... as this is the first time I've heard it mentioned...and I use the client daily!

[Kristoff]

yeah, join the club.

Who knows when Cisco will release it, and then another year and a day for the VPN admins at work/school/wherever to start distributing it (it's not like joe blow can download it from Cisco web site).

So, I might get Tiger on the 29th, but it will collect dust until the VPN client comes forth.

[Kristoff]

Any word on Cisco VPN client that runs on Tiger?

[memory-minus]

Originally Posted by Kristoff

Any word on Cisco VPN client that runs on Tiger?

I work in an enterprise where hundreds of people use the OS X Cisco VPN client -- this is a major freakout so calls were made. The word is that Apple is working closely with Cisco to release an updated client on the 28th or very soon thereafter.

[Brazuca]

Originally Posted by memory-minus

I work in an enterprise where hundreds of people use the OS X Cisco VPN client -- this is a major freakout so calls were made. The word is that Apple is working closely with Cisco to release an updated client on the 28th or very soon thereafter.

Good news. My wife needs it for work and until this is fixed (and USB overdrive, and printing to the HL1440), I can't update without having to sleep in the couch.

I wonder why Apple's built in VPN doesn't support the Citrix protocol. Or does it?

[GeeYouEye]

The Mac version of the Cisco VPN software is crap. If there was any way to replace it, I would. But it works in 10.3.9.

[JLL]

Originally Posted by GeeYouEye

The Mac version of the Cisco VPN software is crap. If there was any way to replace it, I would. But it works in 10.3.9.

Why do you think it's crap? It works as it should.

[JLL]

Originally Posted by memory-minus

I work in an enterprise where hundreds of people use the OS X Cisco VPN client -- this is a major freakout so calls were made. The word is that Apple is working closely with Cisco to release an updated client on the 28th or very soon thereafter.

Great, but you wouldn't upgrade to Tiger from day one anyway, would you?

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by JLL

Great, but you wouldn't upgrade to Tiger from day one anyway, would you?

Certainly not at work, but a lot of people in VPN-equipped places work from home on occasion -it's one of the biggest uses of VPN technology- and they'd probably like to upgrade their home machines.

[JLL]

Our mobile users upgrade when we say so

[memory-minus]

Originally Posted by JLL

Great, but you wouldn't upgrade to Tiger from day one anyway, would you?

Local users upgrade when we say so.

Power users on personal machines at home upgrade whenever they want, and I'd like to be able to tell them an updated client is coming sooner rather than later. We don't have rules against authorized users connecting via personal hardware.

Tiger's built-in VPN client unfortunately does not support our specific authentication methods, as much as I wish it would work.

[Kristoff]

Originally Posted by JLL

Great, but you wouldn't upgrade to Tiger from day one anyway, would you?

Uh, why not?

It's ok JLL....put the punch-cards down. That's right, back away from the punch-cards.

[jlgrandam]

Version 4.0 of the VPN works for me on 10.3.9

[JLL]

Originally Posted by Kristoff

Uh, why not?

It's ok JLL....put the punch-cards down. That's right, back away from the punch-cards.

I have never heard of a sys adm that upgrades all the users to a brand new untested version the day it's released.

I was talking about an enterprise environment here, not a single user at home.

[Deal]

It's probably common news now but I thought I'd post it anyway. Cisco says they will have a Tiger compatible client by the end of May.

That would be acceptable and I'm am appreciative that Cisco considers this a high priority.

Deal

[off/lang]

The end of May? Hmm that doesn't sound like a high priority to me. They've had developer access to Tiger for months...

[starman]

Originally Posted by GeeYouEye

The Mac version of the Cisco VPN software is crap. If there was any way to replace it, I would. But it works in 10.3.9.

Why is it crap? It does what it's supposed to do. What more do you want from it?

Mike

[starman]

Originally Posted by JLL

I have never heard of a sys adm that upgrades all the users to a brand new untested version the day it's released.

I was talking about an enterprise environment here, not a single user at home.

Of course not, but at the same time, if there's something in the update that helps, you'd want that update dispatched ASAP, no?

Mike

[Sophus]

Originally Posted by Kristoff

Does anyone have official word when Cisco will release a Tiger compatible client?

mid may is the word it-staff at uni got. we'll see...

[gmsmith]

Well it appears Cisco updated the Windows VPN client and how ironic...release date was April 29.

(I just checked CCO)

[testah]

greetings..

i really need the cisco client for "everyday life"... i got a new machine with tiger and now i am screwed.. won't work... i cannot really wait around 20 days until release of a newer version, nor am i willing to fill my machine up with 10.3 and than 10.4 again.
it's fresh, clean 10.4 and should stay that way..

are there any known alternatives that will work with tiger?

i don't know anywhere else to look, but i guess here is the right place to ask,
thx,
greetings

[gmsmith]

If you have access to the VPN Concentrator or PIX you are trying to connect to I suppose you could enable PPTP connections.

I created some special rules for my IP address to allow me to do what I absolutely needed to do.

But I have yet to find an IPSEC VPN client that works on Tiger.

10.4.1 does not fix this issue either, but may allow a new Cisco VPN client to work properly.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by off/lang

The end of May? Hmm that doesn't sound like a high priority to me. They've had developer access to Tiger for months...

Indeed, and they've been working closely with Apple for months. I have reason to know this for a fact. Among other things, Apple itself uses a Cisco VPN, so you can bet they have an interest in making it work.

Good software takes time, particularly when dealing with something as complex as VPN technology. I do not know exactly what is taking Cisco so long, but it is most certainly not for lack of prioritization.

[off/lang]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Indeed, and they've been working closely with Apple for months. I have reason to know this for a fact. Among other things, Apple itself uses a Cisco VPN, so you can bet they have an interest in making it work.

Good software takes time, particularly when dealing with something as complex as VPN technology. I do not know exactly what is taking Cisco so long, but it is most certainly not for lack of prioritization.

Understood. I was just being grumpy. Please excuse me. From Ars article it seems like they've solidified the kext framework and added proper versioning, so a wait like this probably will not happen again with other major OS upgrades. (There now, I'm finding the silver lining.)

[legacyb4]

Again, what is meant by this? It gives you a dialog box, presents you with an authentication dialog when you click on "Connect", then does nothing else except to disconnect you when you are finished.

Were you expecting more?

Originally Posted by GeeYouEye

The Mac version of the Cisco VPN software is crap. If there was any way to replace it, I would. But it works in 10.3.9.

[testah]

still searching for an alternative with ipsec & group/user-auth...

waahh.. i wanna connect to my worknetwork again...

*sigh*

[Brazuca]

Interesting:

btw... cisco released a beta client that works with Tiger. My university (USC) started allowing downloads of it about a week ago. So far I haven't had any problems with it....

From here:
http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/...009803731/p/12

Also, have you tried the built in VPN?

You can try using the built-in VPN client in Internet Connect. Ensure you've set up the connection for whichever protocol your company uses (LTP2ORWHATEVERHTHELLITISS, or PPTP) point it at the VPN server and set it up correctly (UNAME/PASS or UNAME/RSA SECURID, etc)

[mitchell_pgh]

There are two ways to look at this. Blame Apple or Blame Cisco.

Many seem to blame Apple... but unless Apple wouldn't give Cisco a version of Tiger, I place blame on Cisco. Oh well. People shouldn't be updating on day one with work machines anyway

[testah]

Originally Posted by Brazuca

Interesting:



From here:
http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/...009803731/p/12

Also, have you tried the built in VPN?

yeah, i did.... lacks of a group/user-pass and "won't work anyway" a *cough* macexpert *cough* told me..

well. i tried about a 100 ways.. won't work with the build in..

no luck in finding this beta release either..

[JLL]

Originally Posted by gmsmith

If you have access to the VPN Concentrator or PIX you are trying to connect to I suppose you could enable PPTP connections.

And that works great.

[wadesworld]

but unless Apple wouldn't give Cisco a version of Tiger, I place blame on Cisco.

Would you ship a piece of software to thousands of customers until you the retail version in your hands?

Wade

[cwagar]

The 'new' Cisco 10.4 compatible VPN client is being tested internally right now. The Mac population inside Cisco (and yes there are many) are anxiously awaiting this software as well. When to expect it? I think the end of May dates are the absolute worst case.

[gmsmith]

Its been posted....available at CCO (single processor only).

Greg

[mmurray]

Originally Posted by gmsmith

Its been posted....available at CCO (single processor only).

Greg

Could you give a link or something ?

Thanks - Michael

[gmsmith]

You need a CCO login....

http://cisco.com

[mmurray]

Originally Posted by gmsmith

You need a CCO login....

http://cisco.com

I went and registered as a guest. Should that be enough ? I also couldn't find anything that looked like VPN. Which section is it in ?

My problem is that if I can't get it as guest I will have to chase up the IT support people who are not very keen on Macs. It would be helpful if I could tell them exactly where they have to go to get the download.

Thanks - Michael

[gmsmith]

You will need to chase down your IT staff

Have them go to Download --> VPN

Client 3.x

It will be there

[johnt519]

I got it (through an associate who has access) (need it to connect to a school).

Seems to work fine. The only thing is when it connects and disconnects, it causes the "lookupd" system service to die and restart:

launchd: Server bf47 in bootstrap 1103 uid 0: "/usr/sbin/lookupd"[880]: exited abnormally: Hangup

So.. it's not perfect, but it works.

I can now update my last system to Tiger! Woo!

[Oneota]

Originally Posted by gmsmith

Its been posted....available at CCO (single processor only).

Greg

Single processor only?? Why are they writing things at such a low level that that matters? What, are they ignoring the kernel APIs Apple has made available to them?

[bitfactory]

i think i found another bug... i can't get the proxy to work correctly (in OSX Preference pane) when connected with the new Cisco client - which means i can't go to sites outside the company's network (USING SAFARI - which uses the http proxy setting in the network prefs)

i know it's the proxy in the network pref pane, cause i can configure the proxy in Firefox and it works fine.

that sucks. anyone else able to duplicate this problem?

[wadesworld]

Single processor only?? Why are they writing things at such a low level that that matters? What, are they ignoring the kernel APIs Apple has made available to them?

Ever consider the possibility that they wrote it correctly and simply ran into a problem?

Wade

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Oneota

Single processor only?? Why are they writing things at such a low level that that matters? What, are they ignoring the kernel APIs Apple has made available to them?

It may not be an issue of low-level coding, at least not on Cisco's part. Azureus used to have a problem running on dual-proc machines -it could even cause a Kernel Panic- and it was written in Java, where you can't code at the low levels you're talking about.

More likely, something is strange with the way the client is threaded, such that it doesn't work properly on dual-proc machines. This kind of bug is not uncommon. While you can have multiple threads on a single-proc machine, they aren't really running at the same time; the computer just switches between them very quickly, and the result is a convincing illusion. When you move to a dual-proc machine, though, you can get two processes or threads actually running simultaneously, and this can have strange effects. Most programmers code as though their app was the only one running on the machine, because for a single-processor computer this is actually true. The illusion of multitasking isn't just for the user; it extends as far as the programs themselves. Only one is running at any given time. On a multiprocessor machine, however, this is no longer true; usually there will be at least two processes running at the same time. Usually this does not cause problems, but for programs that make use of threading the difference between illusion and reality can cause many headaches.

[as2]

For those of you who are having issues I noticed that this piece of software is available, but you would have to pay for it.

Adam