[THIN] Re: CAG Licenses Required for CSG Replacement
- From: "Jeff Durbin" <techlists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 08:18:37 -0800
Good point about concurrent licensing; I'd have to look at how many
concurrent users we have externally at a given time. But regardless of the
number, I'm not paying for VPN licenses to get CSG functionality. It's a
bummer because I really like the VPN functionality, but other VPN
technologies are on the table at my company. It would have been a great way
to let some users start validating the VPN functionality, which *could* have
ultimately been a huge VPN win for Citrix.
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Schneider, Chad M
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 8:31 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CAG Licenses Required for CSG Replacement
Hardware is $2495, list price, a good vendor can cut that some.
We are looking to buy 2, for load balance/redundancy.
We have thousands of VPN users, but only see @ 100-150 concurrent at peak
times.
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Steve Greenberg
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 10:17 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CAG Licenses Required for CSG Replacement
That is a fair point, if they gave away the CSG functionality for the price
of the hardware there would be a lot of shops that would be happy to move to
the new platform. These users could then become VPN users in the future-
point well taken.......
BTW, the hardsware is $2495 and the licenses are concurrent so I doubt you
would need 3500 licenses!
Steve Greenberg
Thin Client Computing
34522 N. Scottsdale Rd. suite D8453
Scottsdale, AZ 85262
(602) 432-8649
(602) 296-0411 fax
steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Jeff Durbin
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 6:43 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CAG Licenses Required for CSG Replacement
That's pretty crappy. I'm still paying $3,000 for the appliance, to replace
a Windows server that's running free software. I have 3500 users with access
via the CSG, and obviously, there's no way I'm paying $350,000 to replace
our CSG's. Too bad for Citrix, as they could potentially have gotten a
foothold in our VPN space via the CSG replacement.
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Steve Greenberg
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 9:04 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CAG Licenses Required for CSG Replacement
Yes it does require licenses. It is a replacement, but not a free
replacement. Once the user connects you can configure whether you give them
a full VPN tunnel, hand off to WI (CSG), or kiosk mode. Any combination of
these features requires a CAG concurrent license. The good news is that box
performs extremely well, is wel integrated with all the CTX products. The
even better news is that it is a hardened LINUX OS and not Windows
pretending to be a security device!
Steve Greenberg
Thin Client Computing
34522 N. Scottsdale Rd. suite D8453
Scottsdale, AZ 85262
(602) 432-8649
(602) 296-0411 fax
steveg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of techlists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 9:49 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] CAG Licenses Required for CSG Replacement
In addition to being a SSL VPN, the CAG is being positioned as a replacement
for CSG. Does anyone know if the CSG functionality requires a CAG license?
Thanks,
JD
Other related posts:
