Hi, On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 07:24:43PM +0100, Gert Doering wrote: > I tend to NAK this, on a number of reasons - we support arbitrary > point-to-point links "since ever" if you do "topology p2p" (can be > out of the same /31, or just arbitrary addresses on both ends), so > I do not see why doing this in "topology subnet" would be beneficial.
I do see where you're coming from - the man page talks about depreciating
p2p, in which case you need to make sure topology subnet does /31s.
It might certainly be a useful excercise to investigate our current
ifconfig (etc) calls - in the 2.5 branch - and possibly get rid of all
the "broadcast" settings, across all platforms that do not need them.
Personally I've never understood why people are so keen on explicitly
configuring broadcast addresses everywhere (like in the network config
files, etc.) - the standard address can be computed and "just works"
(and on a tun interface, there are no link-layer broadcasts anyway, even
if we pretend it were differently).
The code was that way when David and I inherited the project, so I can't
explain *why* it is - but this might be the opportunity to kick out a bit
of needless garbage.
Out of curiosity: does the sitnl code path handle /31s?
gert
--
"If was one thing all people took for granted, was conviction that if you
feed honest figures into a computer, honest figures come out. Never doubted
it myself till I met a computer with a sense of humor."
Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Openvpn-devel mailing list Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
