Hi,

On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 11:09:32AM -0500, Selva Nair wrote:
> This one is too old to cleanly apply, but still sending again
> just to get it into patchwork.

Oh, completely fell of my radar.  But now that you mention it, yes, 
there was something about clearing bits :-)

> (For some reason bouncing to patchwork somehow never works for me, else
> this could have beaten the oldest pending patch record :)

Bouncing my own usually works, bouncing others "sometimes".  Might be
related to SPF records and/or DKIM/DMARC checks...

[..]
> This was missing on Windows when interactive service is in use.
> 
> - Added route_ipv6_clear_host_bits(r6) to delete_route_ipv6: this is
>   required for Windows IP-helper API. Won't hurt other platforms (?)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Selva Nair <selva.n...@gmail.com>
> ---
>  src/openvpn/route.c | 2 ++
>  src/openvpn/tun.c   | 3 +++
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/src/openvpn/route.c b/src/openvpn/route.c
> index fec12c1..85f969e 100644
> --- a/src/openvpn/route.c
> +++ b/src/openvpn/route.c
> @@ -2124,6 +2124,8 @@ delete_route_ipv6 (const struct route_ipv6 *r6,
> const struct tuntap *tt, unsigne
> 
>    gc_init (&gc);
> 
> +  route_ipv6_clear_host_bits (r6);
> +

This is no longer needed, as the clearing is done in

  delete_route_connected_v6_net()

now (2cea72005cb5a825c).

> diff --git a/src/openvpn/tun.c b/src/openvpn/tun.c
> index 560b1a8..40ce202 100644
> --- a/src/openvpn/tun.c
> +++ b/src/openvpn/tun.c
> @@ -5663,6 +5663,9 @@ close_tun (struct tuntap *tt)
>          {
>            if (tt->options.msg_channel)
>              {
> +              /* remove route pointing to interface */
> +              delete_route_connected_v6_net(tt, NULL);
> +
>                do_address_service (false, AF_INET6, tt);
>               if (tt->options.dns6_len > 0)
>                   do_dns6_service (false, tt);

So this part remains, but to avoid code duplication I'd move the
"delete_route_connected_v6_net()" call from the else() branch up 
and before the if (tt->options.msg_channel) clause.

(I'm not adamant on it, though - leaving it there is "all we do is 
in one place").

Looking at the context, this patch is amazingly old... "before the
code reorganization", so it somehow missed 2.4.0...

thanks for bringing it back :-)

gert

-- 
now what should I write here...

Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             g...@greenie.muc.de

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel

Reply via email to