
- Cisco vpn client alternative mac os x#
- Cisco vpn client alternative upgrade#
- Cisco vpn client alternative full#
- Cisco vpn client alternative Pc#
For most people, choosing IPSec is the default choice. This means that SSL VPN licenses are not good value for money since they are only used in exceptional circumstances. Remember that a lot of companies use VPNs as a DR feature and that is the peak load condition when say, 40% of users might connect from home.

So an IOS SSL VPN connection is going to cost about USD$30 per concurrent connection.Īn ASA SSL VPN is going to cost USD$125 per concurrent connection.
Cisco vpn client alternative upgrade#
Here are the USD list prices for the SSL licenses: IOS SSL VPN Licences FL-WEBVPN-10-K9įeature License IOS SSL VPN Up To 10 Users (Incremental)įeature License IOS SSL VPN Up To 25 Users (Incremental)įeature License IOS SSL VPN Up To 100 Users (Incremental)ĪSA 5500 SSL VPN 100 Premium User LicenseĪSA 5500 SSL VPN 250 Premium User LicenseĪSA 5500 SSL VPN 500 Premium User LicenseĪSA 5500 SSL VPN 10 to 25 Premium User Upgrade LicenseĪSA 5500 SSL VPN 25 to 50 Premium User Upgrade LicenseĪSA 5500 SSL VPN 50 to 100 Premium User Upgrade License

I am going to pay for SSL VPN technology that Cisco is forcing you to move towards. But the replacement requires a license for every user past two.Īnd you will be forced to upgrade since the VPN Client doesn’t work on modern systems ((not straightaway, one day Microsoft will get a version of the Windows to replace Windows XP)). So the IPSec VPN, which most of us are very happy with and used to, is free for an unlimited amount of users.
Cisco vpn client alternative Pc#
Cisco vpn client alternative full#
SSL VPN’s have three modes – clientless, thin client and full client.I was reading through some notes from Networkers and made the following list: Which would be fine, I suppose, if I could find a good reason why changing from IPsec to SSL would be a goodthing(gm). But is going to cost us a shedload of cash.This looks like it’s saving Cisco money – they don’t have to develop and maintain two clients.and replace it with a technology that isn’t nearly so lovely, simple and well understood.I need to start planning to replace the Cisco VPN client in the next year or two.You must choose SSL VPN for remote access, because Cisco says so.Cisco doesn’t like IPSec as a dynamic secure remote access method.Cisco isn’t planning on continuing the Cisco VPN Client.You can choose any technology, so long as it is SSL VPNĪ quick look at Cisco An圜onnect will confirm that this is an SSL VPN technology only. There doesn’t seem to be any End of Life or End of Support notices, so the current version must still be getting support, but there is no future for it. There are no current plans to provide 64-bit support for the Cisco VPN Client but 64-bit support is available for the Cisco An圜onnect VPN Client.”

“Cisco VPN Client Version 5 is available for 32-bit Windows Vista. For 圆4 (64-bit) Windows support, you must utilize Cisco’s next-generation Cisco An圜onnect VPN Client.” – Link Here
Cisco vpn client alternative mac os x#
“The Cisco VPN client supports Windows 2000, XP and Vista (x86/32-bit only) Linux (Intel) Mac OS X 10.4 and Solaris UltraSparc (32 and 64-bit). Is that good for customers ? Or are we being shafted to increase revenue ? The Cisco VPN Client that uses IPSec as a dynamic remote access method to IOS, ASA, PIX and C6500 VPN modules is basically dead. But that costs up to USD$125 per VPN client. Cisco has ceased development on the IPSec VPN client, and shifted to pushing the SSL VPN client for remote VPN access for both IOS and ASA platforms.
