The registry mods here for setting a Windows 7 AutoAdminLogon on a Domain worked beautifully, except: The submission of username and password is before the domain.

Early death of Cisco VPN Client forces VPN license fees. 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. But that costs up to USD$1. VPN client. 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 C6.

VPN modules is basically dead. From the Cisco Web site: “The Cisco VPN client supports Windows 2. XP and Vista (x. 86/3.

Linux (Intel); Mac OS X 1. Solaris Ultra. Sparc (3. For x. 64 (6. 4- bit) Windows support, you must utilize Cisco’s next- generation Cisco Any. Connect VPN Client.” – Link Here. And from the Product Q& A’s“Cisco VPN Client Version 5 is available for 3. Windows Vista. There are no current plans to provide 6.

Table of Contents. Release Notes for Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Release 3.1. End-of-Life Date Announced for AnyConnect 3.x. Downloading the Latest. Add Connection Profiles to Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client.

Cisco VPN Client but 6. Cisco Any. Connect VPN Client.”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. You can choose any technology, so long as it is SSL VPNA quick look at Cisco Any. Connect will confirm that this is an SSL VPN technology only. So this leads me to a few conclusions: Cisco isn’t planning on continuing the Cisco VPN Client. Cisco doesn’t like IPSec as a dynamic secure remote access method.

You must choose SSL VPN for remote access, because Cisco says so. I need to start planning to replace the Cisco VPN client in the next year or two. On several thousand desktops. Which is going to be greatand replace it with a technology that isn’t nearly so lovely, simple and well understood. This looks like it’s saving Cisco money – they don’t have to develop and maintain two clients.

But is going to cost us a shedload of cash. Which would be fine, I suppose, if I could find a good reason why changing from IPsec to SSL would be a goodthing(gm). What’s good about SSL VPN then ? I was reading through some notes from Networkers and made the following list: SSL VPN’s have three modes – clientless, thin client and full client. Clientless VPN’s allow you to create a portal, which you can customise. But the replacement requires a license for every user past two. And 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)).

Yeah, I’ve got the same feeling as you. I am going to pay for SSL VPN technology that Cisco is forcing you to move towards. They have chosen to do that. Now that is customer focussed.

Here are the USD list prices for the SSL licenses: IOS SSL VPN Licences. FL- WEBVPN- 1. 0- K9. Feature License IOS SSL VPN Up To 1. Users (Incremental)$3. FL- WEBVPN- 2. 5- K9. Feature License IOS SSL VPN Up To 2. Users (Incremental)$7.

FL- WEBVPN- 1. 00- K9. Feature License IOS SSL VPN Up To 1. Garmin Zumo 660 Routes Downloaden Van on this page. Users (Incremental)$3,0. ASA SSL VPN Licences.

ASA5. 50. 0- SSL- 1. ASA 5. 50. 0 SSL VPN 1. Premium User License$1,2. ASA5. 50. 0- SSL- 2. ASA 5. 50. 0 SSL VPN 2. Premium User License$3,0. ASA5. 50. 0- SSL- 5.

ASA 5. 50. 0 SSL VPN 5. Premium User License$3,9. ASA5. 50. 0- SSL- 1. ASA 5. 50. 0 SSL VPN 1. Premium User License$7,9.

ASA5. 50. 0- SSL- 2. ASA 5. 50. 0 SSL VPN 2. Premium User License$1. ASA5. 50. 0- SSL- 5. ASA 5. 50. 0 SSL VPN 5.

Premium User License$2. ASA- SSL- 1. 0- 2.

ASA 5. 50. 0 SSL VPN 1. Premium User Upgrade License$1,8.

ASA- SSL- 2. 5- 5. ASA 5. 50. 0 SSL VPN 2. Premium User Upgrade License$1,9. ASA- SSL- 5. 0- 1. ASA 5. 50. 0 SSL VPN 5. Premium User Upgrade License$3,9. Rule of Thumb. So an IOS SSL VPN connection is going to cost about USD$3.

An ASA SSL VPN is going to cost USD$1. OUCH! Remember that a lot of companies use VPNs as a DR feature and that is the peak load condition when say, 4. This means that SSL VPN licenses are not good value for money since they are only used in exceptional circumstances. Where’s the WIN then. To be frank, I’m not sure. For most people, choosing IPSec is the default choice. Its simple, well known, easy to do and doesn’t cost anything.

SSL VPN is a bewildering array for policies for inheritance and self configuration. It has all the features of the IPSec client for AAA and maintenace, plus some fancy clientless modes. But it costs quite a bit. Lack of Competition. The IPSec VPN client was made free when all the firewall vendors had VPN capability. But the current lack of competition in SSL VPNs means that prices aren’t likely to reduce. For example, F5 and Juniper needs volume licensing on their SSL VPN products to make any money at all.

Check. Point always charges for for everything until they lose market share. So there isn’t much motivation for Cisco to remove volume licensing on SSL. And by discontinuing the IPSec VPN Client you are being forced to pay the license fee. So Help Me out? Is there some justification that SSL has inherent magical powers or is this a cynical revenue grab ? Sound off in the comments.

I’d love to find out.