Re: Concurrent L2TP/IPSEC connections for Windows Clients behind a shared NAT

-from-home or road-warrior point of view it’s perfect. In a shared office environment however, Windows clients contend for that single available port. Ridiculous. )) James McGoodwin On 11/18/14, 7:45 PM, YASUOKA Masahiko yasu...@yasuoka.net wrote: On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 00:48:44 + James

Re: Concurrent L2TP/IPSEC connections for Windows Clients behind a shared NAT

statement, but any firewall that blocks connecting to 443/TCP outbound is really not gonna be in scope as far as I'm concerned;) ) But so, while we gain that feature, what did you find difficult about administering an OpenVPN instance? -- James McGoodwin From: Ryan Slack r...@evine.camailto:r

Re: Concurrent L2TP/IPSEC connections for Windows Clients behind a shared NAT

It's an option, but I'd prefer to explore possible solutions in the realm of isakmpd/npppd before choosing the solution that requires us to rebuild such a large chunk of our environment. [Kobo Inc.] James McGoodwin 647-297-2334 jmcgood...@kobo.com | www.kobo.comhttp://www.kobo.com/ 135

Concurrent L2TP/IPSEC connections for Windows Clients behind a shared NAT

and also support windows? Some configuration that I've overlooked? Does iked handle NAT-T better than isakmpd for this scenario? Thank you in advance for any advice offered. It's deeply deeply appreciated. James McGoodwin jmcgood...@kobo.com | www.kobo.com 135 Liberty St. Suite 101