I also updated information on these pages:
<https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/Contributing>
<https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/TesterDocumentation>
Both had some pretty badly outdated information.
Samuli
I added this as a Trac "volunteer" task:
<https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/ticket/615>
We have not advertised the "[needs] volunteer" tasks much, so here they are:
<https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/report/20>
Samuli
Hi,
jftr...
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 03:01:01PM +0300, Samuli Seppänen wrote:
We'd need some help build-testing a patched[*] OpenVPN version with
Cygwin and Visual Studio:
<http://build.openvpn.net/downloads/temp/openvpn-2.3_git.tar.gz>
This tree already builds fine on mingw_w64 which is enough for doing the
official builds.
Heiko tested on Cygwin, Lev made it work on MSVC2013 (and the necessary
changes for that have been merged).
So, now this needs people to actually run IPv6-over-IPv6 to *use* the
functionality and report whether it breaks in their setup.
What you need: IPv6 connectivity between OpenVPN client and server, and
IPv6 routing *into* the tunnel, with a route that overlaps the IPv6 address
of the server - either using "redirect-gateway ipv6", or pushing things
like "route-ipv6 2000::/3" with a server inside 2000::/3... if you do
this, you should see something like this in the log:
Tue Oct 6 13:28:57 2015 GDG6: remote_host_ipv6=2607:fc50:1001:5200::4
Tue Oct 6 13:28:57 2015 ROUTE6_GATEWAY 2001:608:4::1 IFACE=eth0
Tue Oct 6 13:28:57 2015 ROUTE6: 2607:fc50:1001::/48 overlaps IPv6 remote
2607:fc50:1001:5200::4, adding host route to VPN endpoint
Tue Oct 6 13:28:57 2015 add_route_ipv6(2607:fc50:1001:5200::4/128 ->
2001:608:4::1 metric 1) dev eth0
Tue Oct 6 13:28:57 2015 /bin/route -A inet6 add 2607:fc50:1001:5200::4/128 dev
eth0 gw 2001:608:4::1 metric 1
the first line is "this is the IPv6 address of the VPN server", the
"ROUTE6_GATEWAY" line is "this is the gateway and interface we have
discovered!". The "overlap" notice means the feature will actually
kick in - it won't, if you have no overlapping routes into the tunnel,
or connect over IPv4 - and the last two lines are the installing of
the /128 host route, which better should work as well :-)
I tested this for 6 scenarios on 9 (!) platforms, so I'm reasonably sure
it works for the common case - but there will be unexpected cases...
gert
