Hi, On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 12:09:43PM -0700, [email protected] wrote: > and @Server, ping -> ClientLAN > > ping 192.168.1.17 > PING 192.168.1.17 (192.168.1.17) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from 192.168.1.17: icmp_seq=2 ttl=63 time=11.4 ms > 64 bytes from 192.168.1.17: icmp_seq=3 ttl=63 time=11.4 ms
woot! :-)
> (1) IIUC, 'this' *will* need a fix? if yes, can I consider it 'in queue' for
> that fix?
It's a wart that gets in the way of "just working right". It's not a
high prio bug as a workaround exists, which is why I didn't come around
to actually fix it yet (I didn't *break* it, it's been broken for many
years now... I just inherited these bits).
> (2) which of these is preferable/recommended:
>
> route-gateway 10.0.0.1
> route 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.1
> route 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 vpn_gateway
> route 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.128
I'm not sure if "vpn_gateway" on the server side (!) actually works.
The others should all do the same thing, in the end. Give OpenVPN what
it thinks it needs, even though it really doesn't.
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [email protected]
fax: +49-89-35655025 [email protected]
pgpvJiONone94.pgp
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft
_______________________________________________ Openvpn-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-users
