Hi,
On 08/04/2021 16:02, Arne Schwabe wrote:
> NCP has proven to be stable and apart from the one VPN Provider doing
> hacky things with homebrewed NCP we have not had any reports about
> ncp-disable being required. Remove ncp-disable to simplify code paths.
>
> Note: This patch breaks client
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 11:24:01AM +0200, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
> On 08/04/21 17:52, Gert Doering wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 05:30:52PM +0200, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
> >> I don't have any evidence with 2.5 right now but this is just a matter
> >> of use/principle to me: I can very
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Friday, 9 April 2021 10:53, Arne Schwabe wrote:
>
> I am not sure how you came to that conclusion. I have written a fairly
> comprehensible documentation how NCP in 2.5 works for our manpage:
>
>>> and I was hoping that this would be resolved before removing something
>>> like --ncp-disable. Having said that, I now see that with openvpn 2.5,
>>> the server mtu is still 1379 in my setup, regardless of whether I use
>>> --ncp-disable or not - seems to me that is still too low.
>>>
>>
>>
Hi Arne, Antonio,
On 09/04/21 11:53, Arne Schwabe wrote:
Am 09.04.21 um 11:24 schrieb Jan Just Keijser:
On 08/04/21 17:52, Gert Doering wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 05:30:52PM +0200, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
I don't have any evidence with 2.5 right now but this is just a matter
of
Am 09.04.21 um 11:24 schrieb Jan Just Keijser:
> Hi,
>
> On 08/04/21 17:52, Gert Doering wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 05:30:52PM +0200, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
>>> I don't have any evidence with 2.5 right now but this is just a matter
>>> of use/principle to me: I can very well
Hi Jan Just,
On 09/04/2021 11:24, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 08/04/21 17:52, Gert Doering wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 05:30:52PM +0200, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
>>> I don't have any evidence with 2.5 right now but this is just a matter
>>> of use/principle to me: I can
Hi,
On 08/04/21 17:52, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 05:30:52PM +0200, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
I don't have any evidence with 2.5 right now but this is just a matter
of use/principle to me: I can very well see that I would like to have a
setup *without* NCP as I simply do
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 05:30:52PM +0200, Jan Just Keijser wrote:
> I don't have any evidence with 2.5 right now but this is just a matter
> of use/principle to me: I can very well see that I would like to have a
> setup *without* NCP as I simply do not need it (e.g. my cipher is
>
On 08/04/21 16:55, Arne Schwabe wrote:
Am 08.04.21 um 16:36 schrieb Jan Just Keijser:
Hi,
On 08/04/21 16:02, Arne Schwabe wrote:
NCP has proven to be stable and apart from the one VPN Provider doing
hacky things with homebrewed NCP we have not had any reports about
ncp-disable being required.
Am 08.04.21 um 16:36 schrieb Jan Just Keijser:
> Hi,
>
> On 08/04/21 16:02, Arne Schwabe wrote:
>> NCP has proven to be stable and apart from the one VPN Provider doing
>> hacky things with homebrewed NCP we have not had any reports about
>> ncp-disable being required. Remove ncp-disable to
Hi,
On 08/04/21 16:02, Arne Schwabe wrote:
NCP has proven to be stable and apart from the one VPN Provider doing
hacky things with homebrewed NCP we have not had any reports about
ncp-disable being required. Remove ncp-disable to simplify code paths.
Note: This patch breaks client without
NCP has proven to be stable and apart from the one VPN Provider doing
hacky things with homebrewed NCP we have not had any reports about
ncp-disable being required. Remove ncp-disable to simplify code paths.
Note: This patch breaks client without --pull. The follow up patch
for P2P NCP will
13 matches
Mail list logo
