Den 06-01-2016 kl. 10:31 skrev j.witvl...@mindef.nl: > Hi Jeff, > > When I was reading your message. Two possibilities came up: > a) smaller subnets take precedence over larger subnets, which can cause all > sorts of undesirable effects when you have overlapping networks (though not > appropriate in your case, I think) > b) conflict between routes pushed by dhcp and openvpn. If the dhcp-lease time > is short, it two can have all sorts of "funny effects" > Next I just had a quick glance on the mentioned url.... > > What caught my attention was this: > On the VPN-server you have this line: > push "route 192.168.112.0 255.255.255.0" > > While your machine has this LAN config: > [root@sequoia ~]# ifconfig > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr aa:bb:00:9D:B2:49 > inet addr:192.168.112.50 Bcast:192.168.112.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 > .... > > You might have a conflict there.... I cannot see a conflict in that. The server tells the client, that the server-LAN is to be routed through the tunnel. Looks to me like the basic setup in all OpenVPN config's.
-- Morten Christensen ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Openvpn-users mailing list Openvpn-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-users
