SparkLabs Forum.

Community Help.

Viscosity and Cisco VPN

I wanted to start a new thread since viewtopic.php?t=16 seems to be very old now.

I'm using the latest Viscosity client 1.7.10 and Cisco AnyConnect 4.5.04029 and I'm unable to get both of them to play nicely together. I have to connect to my corp network using Cisco AnyConnect before I can start up Viscosity. The problem is that Viscosity is not able to set up the routes properly when AnyConnect is running. Any recommendations? We really need to get these two applications working at the same time.
Hi jaymedrano,

The clash the old forum thread talks about is no longer valid. Back in those days both Viscosity and the Cisco client needed to have their own virtual network interface drivers, which could clash. However since then macOS added inbuilt support, and so the inclusion of drivers is no longer required (with the exception of TAP setups), and so there is no more driver clash.

It sounds likely the routing configuration of your connections themselves may clash (i.e. they both are using the same IP range, or attempting to route the same network range/s though the VPN connection, or attempting to route all traffic through them). I recommend examining the routing table for the connections and see if there are any clashes: ... ng-problem

If there are direct IP range clashes (for example both connections want to use 10.0.0.x) then I'm afraid there is no easy way around the problem. The best solution would be to modify one of the setups to use a different IP range or push out routes in a different range.

I checked the routes that are created by AnyConnect and at this point there aren't any conflicts. It looks like the routes are being added to the wrong interface. I've tried adding the command "route-delay 20" (without quotes) to the commands area (under the Advanced tab) in Viscosity. The network interface should start with "tun" but in my situation it always with "en". Sometimes it'll work when there are multiple connections, or when a connection is closed and restarted. It seems like it's a problem with the ordering.

Code: Select all

172.30         UGSc            1        0     en0
Hi jaymedrano,

The interface used by a route depends the gateway address specified for the route: in the case of your example it means that is only reachable by via the en0 interface.

For TAP/bridged interfaces this could mean that the tap interface isn't ready yet (it doesn't have an IP address assigned), which is why route-delay is used. However this doesn't apply to TUN/routed connections. It would have to be the result of a routing clash. Either a route is being added that points through the en0 interface, or isn't reachable through the VPN interface at the time the route is added.

As far as I'm aware there is nothing that would prevent AnyConnect and Viscosity from being able to operate at the same time, as long as the VPN connections themselves don't clash (for example overlapping routes, both trying to route all traffic through their VPN connections, both trying to set the system DNS, etc.).

4 posts Page 1 of 1

Copyright © 2016 SparkLabs Pty Ltd. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy