Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 09:35:44 +0200 From: Gert Doering Message-ID: <20150626073544.GT382@...1296...> References: <1435248080-12670-1-git-send-email-Holger.Kummert@...1516...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5QHW5B18VhxdkQhx" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1435248080-12670-1-git-send-email-Holger.Kummert@...1516...> Subject: Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Del ipv6 addr on close of linux tun interface List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Holger Kummert Cc: openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net --5QHW5B18VhxdkQhx Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi, On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 06:01:20PM +0200, Holger Kummert wrote: > When a linux tun interface is closed (e.g. on disconnect) > an optional ipv6 addr that was previously set is deleted now. > Without this patch a later reconnect would fail with > 'Linux ip -6 addr add failed: external program exited with error status: = 2' > and openvpn would exit. There is a trac ticket to that extent already (trac #141, http://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/ticket/141) - so thanks for the patch :-) I'm not sure I fully understand that usage scenario - which is one of the reasons why that ticket did not proceed. If you use normal nonpersistant tun interfaces, openvpn will destroy the tun interface at exit, removing the IPv6 address in the process. If you use *persistant* tun interfaces, this is usually done for a reason, like "bind (nameserver) cannot bind to new interface addresses because it is running without privileges" - but in this case, we should not remove the address (because then it's gone...) - and arguably not add it either, because it should already be there - because if not, the argument with "other software needs this address" is moot. So - help me understand the scenario. Why are you using persistant tun interfaces but want dynamically added and removed addresses? (I can see that OpenVPN misbehaves but I'm not sure I understand what=20 "the best" solution should be - maybe go for "if that address is already there, do not touch it, otherwise, remove existing address and add new one" instead?) gert --=20 USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~ge= rt/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert@...1296... fax: +49-89-35655025 gert@...1297... --5QHW5B18VhxdkQhx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQCVAwUBVY0A0KkuBuNlUUl1AQIx7gP+NQN7hRpVmRkTFS6f0O/sZtv5/vEjtmNS Q3lMIJcy5pZ4jqDlz0sZNlGwUdRZKgHI1eIbyLaQ+f/lZE21J5AwLWfrEFEbstU7 BZlMOujrZ1PNbVvhTz5Cb6NQLXGphZlw4uAbq6TgWhPBzAv5p2NnwYPFzuVSXiJl ji2qgrBY3NY= =z7Lb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5QHW5B18VhxdkQhx--