Hi,
On 11-11-17 14:36, Gert Doering wrote:
> tun-ipv6 is a no-op nowadays, and we print a warning to let users know -
> which is not helpful for server-pushed tun-ipv6 (which might be the
> result of --server-ipv6 automatically pushing this). So, remove the
> warning if parsing pushed options.
>
> Also, remove the VERIFY_PERMISSION() call here which has side effects
> on the "which class of options got pushed, do we need to act on them
> later on?" flag set.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gert Doering <[email protected]>
> ---
> src/openvpn/options.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/openvpn/options.c b/src/openvpn/options.c
> index 641a26e2..bbf65613 100644
> --- a/src/openvpn/options.c
> +++ b/src/openvpn/options.c
> @@ -5233,8 +5233,10 @@ add_option(struct options *options,
> }
> else if (streq(p[0], "tun-ipv6") && !p[1])
> {
> - VERIFY_PERMISSION(OPT_P_UP);
> - msg(M_WARN, "Note: option tun-ipv6 is ignored because modern
> operating systems do not need special IPv6 tun handling anymore.");
> + if ( !(permission_mask & OPT_P_PULL_MODE) )
add_option() already has a shorthand for this:
const bool pull_mode = BOOL_CAST(permission_mask & OPT_P_PULL_MODE);
> + {
> + msg(M_WARN, "Note: option tun-ipv6 is ignored because modern
> operating systems do not need special IPv6 tun handling anymore.");
> + }
> }
> #ifdef ENABLE_IPROUTE
> else if (streq(p[0], "iproute") && p[1] && !p[2])
>
(I'll leave review of the correctness of the change to someone who
actually understands what tun-ipv6 exactly does.)
-Steffan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Openvpn-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
