Re: [Openvpn-devel] why is "route add failure" considered not an error?

2015-06-21 Thread Gert Doering
Hi, On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 03:55:03PM +0200, Maximilian Wilhelm wrote: > Bonus points for pointing out OpenVPN has not been started with > administrative rights and that that might be the problem. Patch welcome :-) - this is somewhere on my todo list, but I'm not a windows programmer, so I

Re: [Openvpn-devel] why is "route add failure" considered not an error?

2015-06-21 Thread Maximilian Wilhelm
Anno domini 2015 Jan Just Keijser scripsit: Hi, > > OpenVPN history confuses me :-) - right now, I am wondering about the > > following: > > > > - if we call ifconfig to set up the tun device, and that fails, we > > consider it a hard error (openvpn_exec_check(..., S_FATAL, ...) and > >

Re: [Openvpn-devel] why is "route add failure" considered not an error?

2015-06-19 Thread Gert Doering
Hi, On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 06:09:17PM +0200, Jan Just Keijser wrote: > I don't know what the reasoning was behind making "route failures" > non-fatal, but strictly speaking the tunnel is functioning - it's just > the routing that failed :) > I'd be in favour of adding YetAnotherOption to

Re: [Openvpn-devel] why is "route add failure" considered not an error?

2015-06-19 Thread Jan Just Keijser
Yo Gert, On 17/06/15 12:07, Gert Doering wrote: Hi, OpenVPN history confuses me :-) - right now, I am wondering about the following: - if we call ifconfig to set up the tun device, and that fails, we consider it a hard error (openvpn_exec_check(..., S_FATAL, ...) and terminate -

[Openvpn-devel] why is "route add failure" considered not an error?

2015-06-17 Thread Gert Doering
Hi, OpenVPN history confuses me :-) - right now, I am wondering about the following: - if we call ifconfig to set up the tun device, and that fails, we consider it a hard error (openvpn_exec_check(..., S_FATAL, ...) and terminate - if we then proceed to set up routing, and *that*