Pertino - Is Anyone Successfully Using Any Version Above 510 with DNS/AD Connect?
-
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller LOL - Semantics. The gateway product was "developed/engineered" for the purpose of allowing access to devices that did not have the actual client installed on them.
And it is very, very important to understand that none of us recommended the system you are discussing or saying that it was easy. I realize that the name is all Pertino, but the Pertino product we spoke of was designed and produced to be a fundamentally different product that how you are trying to use this. I would say that they can't even be considered the same product given the gaps in "intent".
Also, the DNS bug is a problem that prevents me from using it. period.
DNS bug? In ZT, Pertino or in the "use of" gateways?
-
The gateway, I assume, works fine and DNS works and they "work" as expected which means they do not work together in a transparent way.
-
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller I understand that things have changed with the cradlepoint acquisition but the release of the gateway was prior to that.
That may be so - but the point is the sale people are selling you something that you want - even though it's not really how their product is meant to work. It's like Dell doing a DPACK and then selling you a SAN for one VM host. Will it work - it should.
-
@scottalanmiller Well, I am saying prior to it being made public. I do see your point. In terms of when everyone else knew about it. I was dealing with pertino devs/engineers in trailing a year ago.
-
@scottalanmiller DNS bug is in Pertino because it prevents the dynamic updates of all host records on my DNS servers.
-
@wrx7m said:
@scottalanmiller DNS bug is in Pertino because it prevents the dynamic updates of all host records on my DNS servers.
In the post 510 client? That would be a real bug, yes.
-
@scottalanmiller I haven't even gotten to a point where I can say that DNS does or does not work across the gateway because I can't even get any traffic to traverse the gateway. It gets there then stops.
-
In the years that we used Pertino, we never experienced a DNS or AD problem. Even without the AD Connector, it worked fine.
-
@scottalanmiller Right but you weren't using it when 520 came out.
-
-
Oh I had issues intermittently with Pertino.
Strange DNS resolution issues with websites for starters. Even 2015/2014.
-
So in summary-
Pertino 520+ builds break my DNS when installed on my DNS servers
Pertino gateway does not allow any pertino network traffic to pass through it in my experience. I have tried Ubuntu Server 14.04.3, Ubuntu Server 15.10 and CentOS 7 all with Pertino builds 510, 520, 526 and 528. -
Stick the summary at the top of the thread so it does not get lost
-
@Breffni-Potter said:
Stick the summary at the top of the thread so it does not get lost
It has been at the top of the thread. It is my OP.
-
Funny, someone at CradlePoint spiced up my post about Pertino being rubbish
Then they realised and took the spice up away.
-
Anyone have experience with privatetunnel?
https://www.privatetunnel.com/home/
Edit - Looks like top tier is 10 devices. NM, if that is the case.
-
For what you want, why not use a traditional VPN?
-
@scottalanmiller I was asking for suggestions on traditional VPN several posts up but everyone kept telling me to use ZT LOL. For a "traditional" VPN, do you have suggestions? I like the connection/client running as a service feature of pertino and ZT that enables to run prior to user login.
-
I have a webex with Pertino tomorrow to discuss my issues with the engineers. We will see how that goes. I am still interested in traditional VPN suggestions.
-
I know this isn't traditional but it still piqued my interest. Has anyone heard of Pritunl?
