[Openvpn-devel] Topics for today's meeting

[Samuli Seppänen]

Hi,

We're having an IRC meeting today, starting at 18:00 UTC on
#openvpn-de...@irc.freenode.net. Current topic list is here:



If you have any other things you'd like to bring up, respond to t16s
mail, send me mail privately or add them to the list yourself.

-- 
Samuli Seppänen
Community Manager
OpenVPN Technologies, Inc

irc freenode net: mattock

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [Openvpn-users] Is it possible to access Windows XP shares over port 445?

[Jan Just Keijser]

Hi Henno,

Henno Täht wrote:

FWIW, I posted this issue to Microsoft's forum:
http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/xpnetwork/thread/82388e04-1791-43a0-a678-de8475bce537

Everyone who like this to be answered can mark that article to up the 
"X persons needs an answer" thing.



I think I finally figured it out (I ran into this issue myself this 
morning so I started hacking ;-)) :


if I set "Non-Admin Access" to "Not allowed" in the TAP-Win32 Adapter V9 
Advanced properties page and reboot the box then I can access the shares 
on my WinXP box using

 smbclient -L -p 445 \\192.168.200.2
(where 192.168.200.2 is the VPN IP).

Of course, the problem with not allowing this is that non-Admin users 
can no longer start a VPN connection. You'd need to run

 runas /env /profile user:AdminUser "openvpn ..."
to get around this.

Can somebody verify this? It sounds like a nice one for the FAQ.

share and enjoy,

JJK



2010/6/26 Gert Doering mailto:g...@greenie.muc.de>>

Hi,

On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:50:45PM +0300, Henno Täht wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 22:48, Gert Doering mailto:g...@greenie.muc.de>> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 09:10:10AM +0200, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
> > > assigns a 169.254 address. If this works for you as well
then maybe the
> > > tap-win32 developers can dive deeper into this and find out
why windows
> > > treats the 'always connected' adapter differently from an
'application
> > > controlled' adapter .
> >
> > I'd assume that windows services are not "bound" to "dynamic"
interfaces...
>
> By dynamic interface you mean an interface which has  "Obtain IP
address
> automatically" set?

No, I was thinking about interfaces that sort of "are not always
there".

But that was a misconception, the TAP interface *is* always there
- what's
application controlled is whether it's "connected to an ethernet
cable"
(virtual, of course) all the time, or only if openvpn tells it so.

But in that my idea doesn't really make sense - it's as if windows
wouldn't
start windows sharing if the ethernet cable is not plugged in at
boot time.

gert

--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
 
//www.muc.de/~gert/ 
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany
g...@greenie.muc.de 
fax: +49-89-35655025  
 g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de

[Openvpn-devel] OpenVPN packet loss

[HB]

hi all,
Whether to use udp or tcp, in the client side, after the connection server.Use 
ping vpn server in the client's ip, there will be about 25 ~ 30% packet loss, 
but at the same time, ping the server ip and no packet loss.In the server using 
the ping vpn client's ip, there will be about 25 ~ 30% packet loss.
This is mainly what causes it? How to solve?

__
¸Ï¿ì×¢²áÑÅ»¢³¬´óÈÝÁ¿Ãâ·ÑÓÊÏä?
http://cn.mail.yahoo.com