Hi,

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Selva Nair <selva.n...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 12:41 PM, ValdikSS <i...@valdikss.org.ru> wrote:
>
>> This is known issue (for me), and it was superficially discussed on IRC
>> at some point. It wasn't considered significant to implement
>> block-outside-dns for multiple connections.
>>
>> Is there ahy reason to use block-outside-dns on multiple connections?
>> Just asked supergregg (bug reporter), he probably has a reason if he
>> created the bug.
>>
>
> I have no strong reason except that if an end user gets two configs with
> block-outside-dns enabled it should just work without having to edit the
> configs. Support for dns traffic through each tunnel may not be required,
> but at least one of them working even if block-outside-dns is specified in
> multiple configs looks like a nice thing to do.  Not all users can be
> expected to edit configs.
>
> Selva
>

The IRC summary of Aug 22  says

Discussed "​block-outside-dns and multiple tunnels":

<https://sourceforge.net/p/openvpn/mailman/message/35263770/>
<https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/ticket/718>

It was agreed to move this forward by looking into the approaches
suggested by Selva, and by giving him feedback.


So what is the consensus? Should we support DNS through all tunnels for
which block-outside-dns is specified or just make sure DNS works through at
least one of the tunnels if the option is used on multiple ones?

Thanks,

Selva
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Openvpn-devel mailing list
Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel

Reply via email to