How can we improve Kerio Control?

IKEv2 + MOBIKE allowing stable VPN from wide range of mobile devices.

L2TP with cert or preshared key works well on iPhones or Android when on Wi-Fi or not moving among GSM cells, but how about improvement and move to general IKEv2 VPN server supporting and being supported also by other mobile platforms and allowing roaming in GSM network ?

53 votes
Vote
Sign in
Signed in as (Sign out)
You have left! (?) (thinking…)
Petr Chalupa shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

7 comments

Sign in
Signed in as (Sign out)
Submitting...
  • Andreas Körber commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    It shouldn't be a move to IKEv2. Control should support IKEv1 and IKEv2.
    IKEv2 would also be an option for Host-to-Site VPN.

  • Pierre-Yves Mercier commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    In interfaces add Internet connectivity option IKEV2, SSTP and/or OpenVPN
    (currently there are only PPTP and L2TP option, it very old and not secure)

  • Petr Chalupa commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Customers are less behind firewall and more in front of it, but secure access to protected LAN resources is demanded. And it should be easy access from user’s point of view. And best from mobile devices.
    Please, couldn’t you reconsider you road map?

  • Larry Williams commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    In an earlier suggestion, adding IKEv2 was proposed to gain Cisco ipsec interoperability. Is it possible to combine these two suggestions so that the impact of adding this capability is accurately reflected.

  • Larry Williams commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    There are two recommendations to add IKEv2 into Kerio Control for two different interoperability goals. Can these be combined so that the importance of this upgrade is accurately reflected. In reviewing the forms there maybe a couple other suggestions that are actually related to the absence of IKEv2 support

  • Larry Williams commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Cisco dominates in the enterprise space and we have a number of clients who are forced to either use Cisco equipment or deploy CiscoAnyconnect to gain access to cloud applications running in Enterprise environments. The inability of Control to have any level of interoperability means it can't even be considered larger margin (10+ site) deployments. If more people understood this limitation, believe there'd be more votes.

  • Larry Williams commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Latest Cisco Routers no longer support IKEv1 which makes setting up a site-to-site Tunnel using Control impossible. Need support for IKEv2 and more specifically, explicit testing with Cisco routers to insure compatibility.

Feedback and Knowledge Base