gabriel rosenkoetter on Wed, 26 Sep 2001 03:20:36 +0200 |
On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 09:03:14PM -0400, Michael Leone wrote: > I considered that, but how can that help if my users are on dynamic IP > assignments from their ISP? It doesn't seem right to allow an ISP's > entire range of IPs, just in case. Even if it's really only my dept who > would access via SSH; I'm still trying to get a full VPN going using my > Cisco Pix, for common users. Problem is, the boss wants to make sure > that any home users who have WinME (ack! thfpt!) will be able to access > ... and the cheap Cisco VPN client won't work with WinME; only the $150 > version works with WinME. And they would prefer not to have to pay that > much, for any individual employee to be able to access the whole LAN > remotely. So, apparently NOBODY will be able to. I have some experience with NetBSD's IPSec stuff. I'd be willing to help set it up, if you'd like. I know I recently (a month ago, maybe) saw a PR filed saying that communication with windows clients was broken, but the fact that a PR has been filed means that it is getting or has been fixed. Also, it's not like I'm a member of core or anything, but I can probably leverage some pressure/submit code in the right places (as regards NetBSD) to make it behave. (I'd be surprised if my the company with whom I interned this past summer, Wasabi Systems, wouldn't be interested in a Cisco PIX-killer kind of project. Get a bargain basement PC, a couple of SMC EtherPower cards, and you're good to go. All of this *theoretically* works with the MS VPN client.) -- ~ g r @ eclipsed.net Attachment:
pgp0bbhg6p00L.pgp
|
|