On 08/09/2020 14:36, Vladislav Grishenko wrote: > On kernels earlier than 2.6.38 default routes are the last ones, > so arbitrary host/net route w/o gateway is likely be returned as > first, causing gateway to be invalid or empty. > After refactoring in 2.6.38 kernel default routes are on top, so > the problem with older kernels was hidden.
I haven't paid too much attention here, but I don't think I've seen this point being brought up. But do we really care about such old kernels at all? AFAIK, RHEL-6 (which goes EOL in November this year and which is not planned to be supported in OpenVPN 2.5+) is the only distro carrying such an old kernel release (2.6.32 baseline). Even an internal OpenWRT 19.07 box of mine (which should be upgraded, I know!) ships with 4.14. Unless I'm completely clueless (which is a possibility), 2.4 and 2.6 kernels are mostly interesting for boards with 4MB flash memory. And I would suspect such boards with that little flash memory to belong to that past. (And OpenVPN 2.4 is perfectly fine too for some time forward anyhow, which should work just fine). If this fix has other qualities, then it's fine to consider such a patch. But I don't see the need for this if it is primarily to enable support for ancient kernel releases which are no longer supported by the upstream kernel community (where 4.4 is the oldest one). I would lean on what Antonio says here as well, as he kinda owns the sitnl implementation and API. -- kind regards, David Sommerseth OpenVPN Inc
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Openvpn-devel mailing list Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
