Well, actually I can do it as long as I use adelphia's smtp server and
Kor Kiley wrote:
> Let this be my official complaint. I'm sure there are pros and cons for
> implementing this. But I agree with Chris. It's extremely annoying.
> I've been silently bearing it for some time but I wish it were otherwise.
> And by the way. I can't send out my UVM IMAP mail unless vpn is
> connected. Makes some complaint about the encryption being too weak.
> Is this another problem I just have to live with?
> Thomas McLeod wrote:
>> What you want is called split tunneling. The Cisco VPN client
>> supports split
>> tunneling but only if the Cisco VPN server is configured to
>> allow it for a particular user. Configuring split tunneling at the
>> VPN server
>> is tedious and appears to not have been done at UVM. This is one of the
>> reasons why the Cisco proprietary VPN is a bad choice for UVM. Please
>> inform network services about this problem. Maybe if enough people
>> they'll get the message. *<):-)
>> Quoting Chris Moran <[log in to unmask]>:
>>> Quoting Kor Kiley <[log in to unmask]>:
>>>> Can someone tell me if there is a way that I can access my local
>>>> LAN at
>>>> home while UVM VPN is connected. I have the access local LAN box
>>>> checked in the VPN configuration and that makes no difference. I
>>>> the UDP transport method too.
>>>> I'm using a linksys WRT54G router and I have IPSec and L2TP
>>>> enabled on the router. Perhaps UVM's VPN server simply doesn't allow
>>>> local LAN access?
>>> Yeah, I brought it up a long time ago. EXTREMELY annoying to say the
>>> No one had an answer.
>>> I'd love to hear it.
>>> ) WWRD - What Would Rob Do? )
>>> | Chris Moran a.a.#707 [log in to unmask] |
>>> |Information Systems Analyst Webmaster/Multimedia Developer|
>>> |UVM Center for Teaching & Learning 802.656.0358 Lafayette 407|
>>> | "Dr. Is In" Mo-Tu 12:30-3 Staff Council Representative |