* Nicolas Iooss > As I understand things after reading > https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/Openvpn23ManPage: > (a) With IPv4, OpenVPN server issues an push "redirect-gateway def1" > command which tells the client to configure a default route via what is > in the route-gateway option. This option is retrieved by OpenVPN plugin > using environment variable "route_vpn_gateway" but the first push > command is lost and that's why NetworkManager provides a checkbox to > allow the user to choose whether this VPN connection may be used as > default route or not. > (b) With IPv6, push "redirect-gateway def1" command doesn't do anything > and there is nothing like "route_vpn_gateway". A simple workaround > consists in pushing a route to 2000::/3 but there should be another way > for an OpenVPN server to push IPv6 default routes to its clients.
Yeah, I tried pushing ::/0 but that didn't work at all, the client just ignored it. The work VPN server doesn't push any default routes, nor will it actually route traffic to the internet, only to the specific networks for which it does push a route. So I think it is broken behaviour by NM to redirect the default route to the VPN tunnel by default, when there is absolutely nothing suggesting it should do so. But in any case this has nothing to do with your patches. > Right now, NetworkManager is acting in IPv6 like in IPv4: it creates a > default route unless "use this connection only for resources on its > network" is checked. For OpenVPN I think NM should never create a > default route as the server pushes what is needed, but for other VPN the > situation is certainly different. To be compatible with every VPN > plugin, I've written a patch in bug 706332 which would allow the IPv6 > internal gateway associated with a connection to be NULL, which is > different from "::" (this latest value meaning "configure a default > route without any gateway"). It's kind of pointless to be talking about "gateways" anyway, since this is a point-to-point interface anyway where the gateway concept (i.e. a next-hop pointing to an IP address rather than the interface directly) doesn't make any sense... I guess this is due to limitations in the NetworkManager/OpenVPN code though. Tore _______________________________________________ networkmanager-list mailing list networkmanager-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
