On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 5:27 PM Morgan Wesström <
freebsd-datab...@pp.dyndns.biz> wrote:
> > Do packets with 10.8.0.x addresses ever actually make it on the wire
> > between the router and the OpenVPN server? I was under the impression
> that
> > the encrypted packets created a tunnel at which
Do packets with 10.8.0.x addresses ever actually make it on the wire
between the router and the OpenVPN server? I was under the impression that
the encrypted packets created a tunnel at which the IP address is only
known at the endpoints, which means the OpenVPN client and server
processes, and
-- Forwarded message -
From: Phil Staub
Date: Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: NAT for use with OpenVPN
To: Morgan Wesström
On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 10:34 AM Morgan Wesström <
freebsd-datab...@pp.dyndns.biz> wrote:
> > One additional thing. If you by any chance want
To view an individual PR, use:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id).
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users,
which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering
all versions including experimental development code and
One additional thing. If you by any chance want to communicate with any
of the other machines on your LAN from the VPN clients (not just
Internet access), you need to add a static route for 10.8.0.0/24
pointing to 192.168.1.200 IN YOUR NETGEAR ROUTER or they won't know
where to send their
Yes. I know it's lazy, but I left the local subnet as the route default of
192.168.1.0/24. All of my local hosts are on that subnet. .
I'm PARTIALLY in agreement here.The OpenVPN clients are being assigned
10.8.0.x addresses. Somehow, those addresses need to be translated into the
OpenVPN
> Ah, you have a standalone SOHO router. That changes things drastically. :)
>
> Exactly!
> I assume the computers on your LAN (including FreeBSD) have private IP
> addresses (192.168.x.x)? In that case your Netgear router is doing the
> NAT for you and you don't need to worry about that part.
>
