Hello Antonio,
A few questions wrt the API:
2025-03-18, 02:40:53 +0100, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> +static bool ovpn_nl_attr_sockaddr_remote(struct nlattr **attrs,
> + struct sockaddr_storage *ss)
> +{
> + struct sockaddr_in6 *sin6;
> + struct sockaddr_in *sin;
> + struct in6_addr *in6;
> + __be16 port = 0;
> + __be32 *in;
> +
> + ss->ss_family = AF_UNSPEC;
> +
> + if (attrs[OVPN_A_PEER_REMOTE_PORT])
> + port = nla_get_be16(attrs[OVPN_A_PEER_REMOTE_PORT]);
What's the expected behavior if REMOTE_PORT isn't provided? We'll send
packets do port 0 (which I'm guessing will get dropped on the other
side) until we get a message from the peer and float sets the correct
port/address?
> +static int ovpn_nl_peer_modify(struct ovpn_peer *peer, struct genl_info
> *info,
> + struct nlattr **attrs)
> +{
[...]
> + /* when setting the keepalive, both parameters have to be configured */
> + if (attrs[OVPN_A_PEER_KEEPALIVE_INTERVAL] &&
> + attrs[OVPN_A_PEER_KEEPALIVE_TIMEOUT]) {
> + interv = nla_get_u32(attrs[OVPN_A_PEER_KEEPALIVE_INTERVAL]);
> + timeout = nla_get_u32(attrs[OVPN_A_PEER_KEEPALIVE_TIMEOUT]);
> + ovpn_peer_keepalive_set(peer, interv, timeout);
Should we interpret OVPN_A_PEER_KEEPALIVE_INTERVAL = 0 &&
OVPN_A_PEER_KEEPALIVE_TIMEOUT == 0 as "disable keepalive/timeout" on
an active peer? And maybe "one set to 0, the other set to some
non-zero value" as invalid? Setting either value to 0 doesn't seem
very useful (timeout = 0 will probably kill the peer immediately, and
I suspect interval = 0 would be quite spammy).
--
Sabrina
