|
|
Cisco VPN Client
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Rochester, MN USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
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............
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Vancouver
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
(
Last edited by legacyb4; Apr 18, 2005 at 12:53 PM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: St. Paul, MN
Status:
Offline
|
|
Cisco VPN Client (version 4.0.1 A) working normally here on Mac OS X 10.3.9.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: in front of the keyboard
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
signatures are a waste of bandwidth
especially ones with political tripe in them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: in front of the keyboard
Status:
Offline
|
|
Does anyone have official word when Cisco will release a Tiger compatible client?
|
signatures are a waste of bandwidth
especially ones with political tripe in them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
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!
|
Mac: 15" 1.5ghz PB w/ 128mb vid, 5400rpm 80gb, combo drive, 2gb ram
Peripherals: 20gb 4g iPod, Canon i950, Canon S230 "elph", Canon LIDE30, Logitech MX510, Logitech z5500, M-Audio Sonica Theater, Samsung 191T
PC: AMD "barton" XP @ 2.3ghz, 1gb pc3200, 9800pro 128mb, 120gb WD-SE 120gb
Xbox: 1.6, modded with X3 xecuter, slayers evoX 2.6, WDSE 120gb HDD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: in front of the keyboard
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
signatures are a waste of bandwidth
especially ones with political tripe in them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: in front of the keyboard
Status:
Offline
|
|
Any word on Cisco VPN client that runs on Tiger?
|
signatures are a waste of bandwidth
especially ones with political tripe in them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lost in a "plus" world
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
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?
|
"It's about time trees did something good insted of just standing there LIKE JERKS!" :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Walnut Creek, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
I bring order to chaos. You are in chaos windows, you are the contradiction, a bug wishing to be an OS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status:
Offline
|
|
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
- My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status:
Offline
|
|
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?
|
JLL
- My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status:
Offline
|
|
Our mobile users upgrade when we say so
|
JLL
- My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lost in a "plus" world
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: in front of the keyboard
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
signatures are a waste of bandwidth
especially ones with political tripe in them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
Version 4.0 of the VPN works for me on 10.3.9
|
12.1" Powerbook G4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
JLL
- My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Rochester, MN USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: PVD/MSP
Status:
Offline
|
|
The end of May? Hmm that doesn't sound like a high priority to me. They've had developer access to Tiger for months...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Norway
Status:
Offline
|
|
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...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Williamsburg, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Well it appears Cisco updated the Windows VPN client and how ironic...release date was April 29.
(I just checked CCO)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Williamsburg, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: PVD/MSP
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Vancouver
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
still searching for an alternative with ipsec & group/user-auth...
waahh.. i wanna connect to my worknetwork again...
*sigh*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
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)
|
"It's about time trees did something good insted of just standing there LIKE JERKS!" :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Brazuca
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..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
JLL
- My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Williamsburg, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Its been posted....available at CCO (single processor only).
Greg
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by gmsmith
Its been posted....available at CCO (single processor only).
Greg
Could you give a link or something ?
Thanks - Michael
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Williamsburg, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by gmsmith
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Williamsburg, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
You will need to chase down your IT staff
Have them go to Download --> VPN
Client 3.x
It will be there
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
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!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Urbandale, IA
Status:
Offline
|
|
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?
|
"Yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation" yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status:
Offline
|
|
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.
|
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Northants, UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
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
|
[img=http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/1300/desktj.jpg]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|