For the love of jebus please give us IPSEC & PPTP!

[trans_lux]

We as a company had moved away from using PIX because of the proprietary nature and complicated and convoluted to be complicated and convoluted to support the old boys network. After a year or so with Smoothwall we found UT, BTW from a blog post of the former founder of SW. Its features, functionality and ease of use was like a breath of fresh air. I care enough about UT that I want it to more than just survive I want it to thrive.
The bottom line is that IPSEC & PPTP are about as ubiquitous and universally accepted as you can get and UT must, must have this to be a viable product.

[sky-knight]

If it is to be used in enterprise sure, but not for the SMB market.

Untangle is doing rather well for itself all things considered. New features are always selling points. The only issue I see is the 10 interface limit imposed by the kernel. Each VPN connection is a separate interface.

Anyway, I'm sure this stuff is on the list. Do some digging in bugzilla.untangle.com. Find the feature request for the PPTP or IPSec feature and vote for it. That is how the developers pick what feature is next.

[trans_lux]

Since I'm from Chicago I tried to vote more than once Any my vote is in.
Please anyone else who thinks that IPSEC VPN is important please go to http://bugzilla.untangle.com/ and vote!

[sky-knight]

LOL Now that's what I'm talkin about!

[itcinc]

I will also agree with trans_lux that IPSEC support is a MUST have feature. The fact that UT will not communicate with existing IPSEC devices is a HUGE handicap - even in the small business market.

I have already cast my vote in support of this feature....have you voted yet? Make your preferences known by voting here
http://bugzilla.untangle.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3158

Remember vote early and vote often....

[u3b3rg33k]

Can you name any mobile device that supports OpenVPN? I can't. Hell its barely supported on OSX. And considering this is where we are headed we need to get on with a solution already.

I point you at Viscosity sir. it works beautifully with 10.5.x and 10.6 (and UT).
http://www.viscosityvpn.com/
at $9, if it's too expensive you need a job.

[sky-knight]

I point you at Viscosity sir. it works beautifully with 10.5.x and 10.6 (and UT).
http://www.viscosityvpn.com/
at $9, if it's too expensive you need a job.

Now don't be so harsh, it's more like... if $9 is too expensive you should have saved the money buying a PC instead.

[trans_lux]

We use Tunnekblick, its free and it works fine, but takes a bit of work.
http://code.google.com/p/tunnelblick/
Try walking a client though a set up over the phone and you will see what I referring to.

Please understand I have nothing against OPENVPN, it works great for UT-to-UT VPN's, and if you are using WINXP the install process from UT is straight forward. We have been using UT for some time and from day one I suggested that IPSEC is a necessary feature. We have seen numerous substantial version updates from UT but alas IPSEC is just not on radar. This I can't understand???

[richardwang5000]

7.0 and still no sign of ipsec.

[sky-knight]

What did you think a feature this massive would just materialize in the new version?

7.0's massive fix was the reports module.