FW: CISCO VPN (IOS) and F-Secure VPN+ Client interoperability
Jose Muniz
MuniX-1 at PACBELL.NET
Sat Aug 19 03:13:18 EDT 2000
Well, I desagree with you cus the Cisco client does not have the
same feature set as F-Secure Client, and what is bad about it is that id
does not support split tunneling as well as the F-Secure.
With F-Secure you can have an IPSec connection on a particular port
and plain text to the same host or subnet on a different port in the
plain.
Also the NAT capabilities of F-Secure are outstanding, and you know
how much this helps when routing is the show stoper.
Jose Muniz
Larry Thompson wrote:
>
> Use the Cisco VPN client. Then you won't have this problem.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rodolphe DOCQUOIS [mailto:rdocquois at NOMEA.FR]
> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2000 2:56 AM
> To: VPN at SECURITYFOCUS.COM
> Subject: CISCO VPN (IOS) and F-Secure VPN+ Client interoperability
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm testing IPSec VPN with a CISCO router 2611 (as Gateway) and your VPN
> Client (F-Secure VPN+ 4.2).
>
> The architecture is describe just below :
>
> FTP Server <-----> CISCO 2611 IOS 11.3.9T <========>F-Secure VPN+
> Client 4.2
>
> I would like to make an IPSec Tunnel (ESP + DES + SHA with pre-shared
> mode) between the Cisco and the VPN +.
>
> Issues :
> Phase 2 negotiation failed, cause no proposal chosen even if the same
> proposal have been setup.
>
> Questions :
> Can we use VPN+ Client with a CISCO router to make an IPSec tunnel ?
> If it is YES : Which parameters need to be modified (on VPN+ and
> CISCO)?
> Can VPN+ make IPSec VPN with Hybrid mode ?
>
> Thanks
VPN is sponsored by SecurityFocus.COM
More information about the VPN
mailing list