On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, Mathias Sundman wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, Mathias Sundman wrote: > > > Just because someone reported about problems with route additions via IPAPI > > when using PPP or PPPoE adapters the other day, one of my users reported > > the > > same problem to me today. I'll try to reproduce it on my computer later to > > night, so we can get to the bottom with that problem. > > > > While thoubleshouting that problem, I switched to --route-method exe, but > > found another problem! > > > > I would call it bug in Windows route.exe rather than in OpenVPN. The > > problem > > is that when using --redirect-gateway def1, and disconnecting, OpenVPN > > executes the command: > > > > ROUTE DELETE 0.0.0.0 MASK 128.0.0.0 > > > > The problem is that route.exe deletes both the 0.0.0.0/1, AND the real > > 0.0.0.0/0 route, regardless if the MASK option is used or not. > > > > I double MS will fix this, so I think we need to work around this. > > > > I can see two solutions: > > > > 1) Re-add the old default gw, like we do when not using the def1 parameter. > > > > 2) Also specify the gateway parameter on the route delete cmd. This causes > > route.exe only to delete the correct route. > > Here's a small patch that does the trick for me: > > $ diff -u route.c.orig route.c > --- route.c.orig Sun Jan 9 18:46:28 2005 > +++ route.c Fri Jan 21 21:12:22 2005 > @@ -820,8 +820,10 @@ > > #elif defined (WIN32) > > - buf_printf (&buf, ROUTE_PATH " DELETE %s", > - network); > + buf_printf (&buf, ROUTE_PATH " DELETE %s MASK %s %s", > + network, > + netmask, > + gateway); > > msg (D_ROUTE, "%s", BSTR (&buf));
This is good, though we need to be sure that this will consistently work for different kinds of routes. The dwForwardType fix for the IP helper API + RRAS problem shows that there's a certain amount of hidden complexity in the Windows routing engine that can potentially break things if it's not fully understood. James
