-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 20/02/10 00:06, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
> On 02/19/2010 04:57:30 PM, David Sommerseth wrote:
>
> Am I wrong or does using --disable-depr-random-resolv
> not remove the random choice?
That is correct. According to the newly agreed feature removal proc
On 02/19/2010 04:57:30 PM, David Sommerseth wrote:
Am I wrong or does using --disable-depr-random-resolv
not remove the random choice?
> From: David Sommerseth
> For now this feature is enabled by default, but can be disabled by
> running
> ./configure with --disable-depr-random-resolv. In th
From: David Sommerseth
(I'm withdrawing the first version, and suggesting this patch to be used
instead,
as this one follows the new feature deprecation process.)
Based on a discussion on the mailing list and in the IRC meeting Feb 18,
it was decided to remove get_random() from the getaddr() fu
On 02/19/2010 04:42:49 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
> - the external globals in6addr_any and in6addr_loopback will not
>be compiled in (in6_addr.c).
>
>** I expect this to cause linking problems for my code **
> As said: I would welcome contact to someone who is using
> uClibc+OpenVPN
> and
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 08:33:04PM +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
> > [uclibc without UCLIBC_HAS_IPV6]
>
> I have to investigate.
And so I did. The impact of UCLIBC_HAS_IPV6=0 is fairly low:
- getaddrinfo() will not resolve IPv6 addresses (but *will* be available)
- the external globals in6
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 02:48:44PM +0200, Samuli Seppänen wrote:
> Here's the summary of last week's meeting.
Thanks,
> Btw. what do you think about including the full IRC chatlog in these
> emails? It would make it much easier to see exactly what was discussed.
> After all, the summary is
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:50:10PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >> I'm fine with whichever path you choose. But just bear in mind, some
> >> systems might not have IPv6 support - which breaks portability ...
> > On the unixish side, there is no system which has tun/tap today but
> > does no
>> I'm fine with whichever path you choose. But just bear in mind, some
>> systems might not have IPv6 support - which breaks portability ...
> On the unixish side, there is no system which has tun/tap today but
> does not have IPv6.
What about embedded systems using uclibc compiled "without ipv6
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 05:18:29PM +0100, David Sommerseth wrote:
> I initially meant a more dynamic approach, changing it via the config
> file at runtime - by modifying a global C variable. But I agree, doing
> it via the ./configure script should really be sufficient.
ACK.
gert
--
USE
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 05:37:48PM +0100, David Sommerseth wrote:
> ACK
>
> Patch looks sensible, and applies cleanly to the master branch.
ACK. I can see the reason for doing so (as I'll have a device "soon"
that will return 0 from tun device reads under certain circumstances)
and it does
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
With --verb 5, openvpn logs a single letter (rwRW) for each package
received or sent. I recently ran into a problem with the tun device on
Linux where the read from that device returned 0. Unfortunately this was
also logged as "r", which made me assume
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/02/10 17:05, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
> On 02/19/2010 03:02:40 AM, David Sommerseth wrote:
>> On 19/02/10 04:18, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>
>>>
>>> If it's a config var, it could indeed just be a global var, so I
>> don't
>>> think it would be very comp
On 02/19/2010 03:02:40 AM, David Sommerseth wrote:
> On 19/02/10 04:18, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >
> > If it's a config var, it could indeed just be a global var, so I
> don't
> > think it would be very complex. But that's really not something
> the
> > user should have to configure.
>
> That de
On 02/19/2010 06:48:44 AM, Samuli Seppänen wrote:
> Btw. what do you think about including the full IRC chatlog in these
> emails?
I like it. (And don't see the point in having a separate attachment
either. It's just one more thing to have to click on.)
Karl
Free Software: "You don't pay b
On 02/19/2010 06:25:10 AM, Siim Põder wrote:
> Hi
>
> Karl O. Pinc wrote:
> > So, unless you're pulling names out of /etc/hosts it's likely
> > that randomization does nothing. And if the bind administrator
> > has gone to the extra work to enable a fixed ordering of
> > RR records then randomiza
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Compiled the master branch from openvpn-testing.git on Fedora 12, and
noticed these warnings:
-
ssl.c: In function ‘verify_callback’:
ssl.c:944: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘
On Feb 19, 2010, at 08:56:23, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 03:29:48PM +0100, David Sommerseth wrote:
>> I'm fine with whichever path you choose. But just bear in mind, some
>> systems might not have IPv6 support - which breaks portability ...
>
> On the unixish side, t
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 03:29:48PM +0100, David Sommerseth wrote:
> I'm fine with whichever path you choose. But just bear in mind, some
> systems might not have IPv6 support - which breaks portability ...
On the unixish side, there is no system which has tun/tap today but
does not have IPv
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 03:34:41PM +0100, David Sommerseth wrote:
> So I lean towards JJO here, as far as possible, avoid using functions
> which are not thread safe.
I'm not yet convinced that inet_ntop() is actuall not thread-save -
but independent of that, it's not a tie-breaker here :-)
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 03:21:34PM +0100, JuanJo Ciarlante wrote:
> > JJO's patch does more than that, he does DNS lookups to print the
> > DNS name for the IPv6 address in question.
>
> Wrong.
> From getaddrinfo(3):
>"""
> If hints.ai_flags contains the AI_NUMERICHOST flag then the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/02/10 15:21, JuanJo Ciarlante wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
[...snip...]
>> The existing
>> code doesn't do reverse DNS lookups for IPv4 mroute printing, and so
>> the IPv6 code should behave similar to the IPv4 c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/02/10 14:46, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:10:29PM +0100, David Sommerseth wrote:
I still need to do some touches for allmerged, as
we conflict w/ Gert's IPv6 patch on a mroute.c chunk
IIRC.
>>
>> Even t
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:10:29PM +0100, David Sommerseth wrote:
>> >> I still need to do some touches for allmerged, as
>> >> we conflict w/ Gert's IPv6 patch on a mroute.c chunk
>> >> IIRC.
>>
>> Even though I know you both have tol
David Sommerseth wrote:
> I believe there are som better ways to catch the last commit ID,
git rev-list HEAD -1
//Peter
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:10:29PM +0100, David Sommerseth wrote:
> >> I still need to do some touches for allmerged, as
> >> we conflict w/ Gert's IPv6 patch on a mroute.c chunk
> >> IIRC.
>
> Even though I know you both have told me that there would be a merge
> conflict in mroute.c, I deci
> Hi,
>
> Here's the summary of last week's meeting. The initial feature
> deprecation process is described in it, as well as here:
>
> http://www.secure-computing.net/wiki/index.php/OpenVPN/Developer_documentation
>
> As we all need to follow the process, please let if there are any
> problems wi
Hi,
Here's the summary of last week's meeting. The initial feature
deprecation process is described in it, as well as here:
http://www.secure-computing.net/wiki/index.php/OpenVPN/Developer_documentation
As we all need to follow the process, please let if there are any
problems with it. There's d
Hi
Karl O. Pinc wrote:
> So, unless you're pulling names out of /etc/hosts it's likely
> that randomization does nothing. And if the bind administrator
> has gone to the extra work to enable a fixed ordering of
> RR records then randomization destroys his work.
That's entirely dependent on the D
Hey David,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:14 PM, David Sommerseth
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 18/02/10 22:45, JuanJo Ciarlante wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 6:46 PM, JuanJo Ciarlante wrote:
>>> > Hi David,
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 7:49 PM, David Som
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 18/02/10 22:45, JuanJo Ciarlante wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 6:46 PM, JuanJo Ciarlante wrote:
>> > Hi David,
>> >
>> > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 7:49 PM, David Sommerseth
>> > wrote:
>
> Greetings all!
>
> I am now announcing the openvpn-test
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi guys!
On 18/02/10 22:45, JuanJo Ciarlante wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 6:46 PM, JuanJo Ciarlante
wrote:
>
>> I still need to do some touches for allmerged, as
>> we conflict w/ Gert's IPv6 patch on a mroute.c chunk
>> IIRC.
>
Even though I kno
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 18/02/10 23:23, Eric F Crist wrote:
> How is -devel being numbered, and how are we handling snapshots for
> propagation of -devel versions? I've spoken with Matthias Andree, the
> FreeBSD port maintainer, and he'll be handing maintainership to me
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/02/10 04:18, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> You are right in regards to dynamic memory allocation. You're using
>> static array allocation, defined by MAX_IPS_PER_HOSTNAME. This value is
>> set to 100. Where did you take this number from? IMHO, tha
> You are right in regards to dynamic memory allocation. You're using
> static array allocation, defined by MAX_IPS_PER_HOSTNAME. This value is
> set to 100. Where did you take this number from? IMHO, that sounds to
> be fairly high.
Actually, I don't use static allocation but stack allocation
34 matches
Mail list logo
