On 06/04/17 16:59, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
> On 06/04/17 15:28, Kapetanakis Giannis wrote:
>>
>>
>> Without wanting to hijack this thread,
> well, you are... hence I've changed the subject
>> If someone uses the default net30 and wants to migrate to subnet
>> topology
>> would there be conflicts w
On 06/04/17 15:28, Kapetanakis Giannis wrote:
>
>
> Without wanting to hijack this thread,
well, you are... hence I've changed the subject
> If someone uses the default net30 and wants to migrate to subnet topology
> would there be conflicts with the following setup:
>
> server 10.0.0.0 255.255.255
On 06/04/17 15:20, David Sommerseth wrote:
> On 06/04/17 15:09, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
>> On 06/04/17 08:28, saato...@keemail.me wrote:
>>> I was able to confirm my suspicion, if I reuse the random ports (which
>>> OpenVPN chose with `nobind`) with `lport`, I'm reassigned the previous
>>> IP addre
On 04/04/17 13:34, David Sommerseth wrote:
> On 04/04/17 11:50, Илья Шипицин wrote:
>> hello,
>>
>> you did not use "topology", so, I guess "net30" is used by default.
>> if so, you spent 4 addresses per connection.
>
> Yes --topology net30 is the default. Unfortunately, we cannot easily
> change
On 06/04/17 15:09, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
> On 06/04/17 08:28, saato...@keemail.me wrote:
>> I was able to confirm my suspicion, if I reuse the random ports (which
>> OpenVPN chose with `nobind`) with `lport`, I'm reassigned the previous
>> IP addresses. This effectively resolves the IP pool exhau
On 06/04/17 08:28, saato...@keemail.me wrote:
I was able to confirm my suspicion, if I reuse the random ports (which
OpenVPN chose with `nobind`) with `lport`, I'm reassigned the previous
IP addresses. This effectively resolves the IP pool exhaustion.
However, I still haven't found a way to id
