On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 04:05:25PM +0300, Saku Ytti wrote: > Ok. This is because unnecessary and undesirable sanity check that same > peerIP cannot exist twice.
Hi You are right, there is a lock to avoid run two instances for the same neighbor. Although the primary reason for this lock is to have proper ordering of protocol startups during reconfiguration. We should fix it to avoid this issue. > And in fact the hack probably shouldn't work, we likely shouldn't accept > those sessions as peerPort is not right. But for me this works great for It should, because incoming connection has random/ephemeral source port, so it is not verified. -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: santi...@crfreenet.org) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."
