@Georg Pauwen Georg Pauwen    The PDF you provided has a critical deletion on page 1; regards the needed IPSec profile settings hard coded into Windows L2TP/IPSec clients without disclosure of details by Microsoft.   O.P. Ridellec ridellec@gmail.com       posted the IPSec parameters, and they are not the right ones.     I'll repost Pauwen's PDF with title change and said IPSec parameters supplied on page 1. ... View more

Ms. Calero and Mr. Raizada have both cited, and thankfully, provided the same-named PDF setup advice for RV340 as L2TP/IPSec server.     To my amazement, they are not identical in content.     The files are different, insofar as Ms. Calero's PDF is deleted for critical IPSec profile setup information on page 1 of the 4 page document.     Thank you, Mr. Raizada, for providing this much needed, oh-so-hard to discover information; Windows clients are hard-coded for IPSec and nobody at Microsoft bothered to tell its customers how to set up a matching L2TP/IPSec server.   Yes, this is infuriating. I have re-posted Mr. Raizada's uploaded PDF with elaborate titling.    Have mercy on your customers, Cisco and Microsoft!  Pity the uninitiated, the struggling, the faithful drawn to Cisco's good name. ... View more

On Thursday, March 7, 2019, I obtained attained, quite exactly, tonyatsp's level of success, and "failure."  "Failure" to find any way to employ encryption in the PPTP connection, that is, while being "successful" insofar as to make connections (repeatedly to boot) at all.  Clients were (employed separately, not simultaneously, though that probably would also work, as long as all authentication and data flow was in clear text with no PPTP encryption, at all)    Windows XP client, or Windows 10 client.       There were four client computers involved in such testing; two of each Windows OS type were local (connected to the RV340 @ LAN port) and two of each Windows OS type were remote (connected to RV340 @ WAN port, via internet, and geographically distal). One thing John did, beyond tonyatsp (who actually was silent on this point) was to simultanously employ an IPSec (Layer 3) VPN, for the remote hook up; the PPTP connections were made and unmade, regardless of whether the IPSec VPN was enabled and up, enabled and down, or disabled.     So that's encryption, and it's AES-256 bit encryption at that.  But it's Layer 3 encryption, so there a problem because the Layer 3 datagram is a "packet" which is smaller than a Layer 2 datagram, which is a "frame" that envelopes every packet.    So unencrypted Layer 2 PPTP frames have exposed headers  and footers, it seems.     So the impetus to encrypt, at Layer 2, remains. ... View more

Well, I say it's a bug, not an intentional malfunction. I'm angry with Cisco's Small Business Line, for its waste of my time, and for wasting the time of so many others, silent and vocal, who obviously exist.   By the way, L2TP server suffers from the same BUG as PPTP server, in the latest RV340 incarnation (f/w very recent.1.0.02.16) That is, there occurs an immediate "range error" upon attempt by user to establish client IP addresses, in the RV340's L2TP server set up.  STILL, AFTER ALL THESE YEARS. Hey, I sent my RV340 back for a refund.   For reason of "defective design, in matters critical to me." I still manage others. ... View more

Can anyone advise, on how his or her need for PPTP was filled?     Obviously, some other pathway, some other equipment, must have been employed.   As of Feb 25, 2019, with the latest firmware (1.0.02.16) the "range error" bug remains in the RV340 design. ... View more

This is an obvious BUG in the RV340's firmware, as PPTP server function worked in predecessor equipment RV320.   Chet Prokop said so, and I believe him.      Has Cisco fixed this bug yet? ... View more

A veteran says to draw down the configuration (XML) file to a word editor; to change a parameter to "enable," and then to save that XML file; then to overwrite the existing config file of the RV340 with the newly modified config file.     After that, the "console" should work, via SSH. https://www.al3xclarke.co.uk/access-cisco-rv340-cli-via-ssh/ ... View more

Your observations, deductions, and actions were all valuable to me as encouragement and advice.    Indeed this was supposed to be possible!    I had a testimonial to that effect!   I needed it, because under similar circumstances, I was utterly discouraged with 'failure' responses. I suddenly suspected that crossing between separately serialized equipments, though of the same model number, was not allowed... and simply rejected without explanation.       In my case, it was more difficult than in your case.        Indeed, your caveats were necessary, but not sufficient.  And while I will try to offer some guidance to anyone who comes after me, please understand that I could never provide an "IFF" (IF and ONLY IFF) prescription here.     I can only regurgitate what worked for me: I upgraded the firmware of the target RV340, to match that of the source RV340 (which was fully updated to xx.xx.1.18).    This was easy; I downloaded the f/w from Cisco, logged into the target RV340 with a browser (on subnet 192.168.1.x), and did the deed. After that, I still got 'failure(s)' in my attempts to upload a configuration file from either my computer or a USB flash drive.        So I went THE OTHER WAY; I saved the current, rudimentary configuration of my target RV340 to my USB flash drive and my computer.      This worked, and encouraged me to know that, at least, SOME file transfer was possible.    Only after that admittedly wacko action, did I succeed in uploading the configuration of another RV340 (f/w v 18) into the target RV340.  Voila!     I'm not arguing with success. ... View more

Does IPSec work, for you, using RV340? It should. ... View more

It would be helpful to others if the O.P. discloses his platform, when discussing VPN Clients.    To wit:  Cisco's QuickVPN turned out to be a fail, on Windows 10. ... View more

Thanks for the tip!      By using non-standard port 587, instead of port 465, along with an application-specific (unique) password which I generated at my Google Account Page, I finally succeeded in getting my new RV340 to sent out g-mails.    Yikes, why did this have to be so difficult?       The Cisco manual surely glossed over this.        Otherwise I used plain text authentication, and TLS/SSL encryption... all very standard for g-mail. ... View more

This helps the OP set up his router, but says nothing about setting up the client.   And the OP never told anyone what his client-side computer looks like.      There is an old software offering by Cisco, isn't it called "QuickClient" that provides the client-side VPN (for an IPSec VPN?), in an old Windows computer.     Won't work at all on Windows 10.      Supposedly works on Windows XP and Windows 7.      Too bad Cisco didn't update it.  ... View more