On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 09:13:19AM +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
> ... ifconfig_sanity_check() does *nothing* for TOP_SUBNET 

Overlooked the second patch (since it wasn't threaded).  So with the other
patch, that argument is no longer valid, of course.  Apologies.

> Also we might to re-think the warning message printed - if called from
> an ifconfig-push context, the text "the second argument to --ifconfig must
> be an IP address" is less than clear ("my --ifconfig settings are just 
> fine, what is openvpn warning about?").

That one still holds...  technically it's more "for the other patch",
but since *this* patch is calling ifconfig_sanity_check() from a new
context, it should tackle the now-misleading warning text, I think.

(So maybe apply the other one first, after verifying endian correctness 
on sparc or mips/be architecture, and this one then removes the static,
adds a flag for "ifconfig or ifconfig-push context?" and adapts the
messages accordingly)

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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today.http://sdm.link/xeonphi
Openvpn-devel mailing list

Reply via email to