Hi, On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 06:44:31PM +0600, Vladimir Kamarzin wrote: > > Adding it would solve the issue at hand, but I'm not convinced that you'll > > be happy with the end - it might actually end up saturating VPN links and > > making users unhappy if you have "much flooded traffic" (which happens in > > some of the networks). > > I've patched openvpn this way and testing this setup right now, it > working well for now. I think it may be implemented as an option > (config or ifdef). What do you think?
I'm torn.
We do not want more options, we really have enough - but that *should* be
configurable, and not the default, so if we integrate it, it needs to have
an option ("tap-flood-unknown-unicast" or something like that).
So on the feature itself, if it has an option, I'd stay neutral in regards
to ACK/NAKing, and focus on the code review.
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
pgpT_J2iVM2Dt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
