Re: [Openvpn-devel] Connect several subnets with OpenVPN2.0
Hi James, I totally overlooked this. Thank you for your help. Regards, Robin On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 09:16:09AM -0600, James Yonan wrote: > > > On Wed, 8 Sep 2004, Robin G. Wenninger wrote: > > > Hi list, > > > > I have a kind of "problem" here. > > > > I thought about connecting several subnets with 2.0 and for this purpose > > use the PUSH/PULL-Options. > > > > So I used options like > > push "route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0" > > push "route 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0" > > > > To push all known subnets to the Clients. But the problem is, if I push > > route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 to the Client which "owns" this subnet it > > overwrites the old routing entry and kicks its Subnet. > > > > My recommendation would be a kind of exception list. > > Something like > > push "route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0" except common-name > > > > What do you think about this, is there any other (good to administrate) > > solution? > > Interestingly enough, I think that this exception mechanism is already > built into the way that IP routing works. > > For example, suppose I push my all-inclusive /16 subnet: > > push "route 10.11.0.0 255.255.0.0" > > Now suppose a client has taken a /24 subset of this range such as > 10.11.45.0/255.255.255.0. > > The all-inclusive /16 route will match at a lower priority in the client's > routing table than the client's private /24 subnet, so both subnets can > coexist on the client. The 10.11.45.0/255.255.255.0 subnet will match on > any of the client's local traffic, while packets directed to 10.11.x.y > will get routed back to the server when x is not equal to 45.
Re: [Openvpn-devel] Connect several subnets with OpenVPN2.0
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004, Robin G. Wenninger wrote: > Hi list, > > I have a kind of "problem" here. > > I thought about connecting several subnets with 2.0 and for this purpose > use the PUSH/PULL-Options. > > So I used options like > push "route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0" > push "route 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0" > > To push all known subnets to the Clients. But the problem is, if I push > route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 to the Client which "owns" this subnet it > overwrites the old routing entry and kicks its Subnet. > > My recommendation would be a kind of exception list. > Something like > push "route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0" except common-name > > What do you think about this, is there any other (good to administrate) > solution? Interestingly enough, I think that this exception mechanism is already built into the way that IP routing works. For example, suppose I push my all-inclusive /16 subnet: push "route 10.11.0.0 255.255.0.0" Now suppose a client has taken a /24 subset of this range such as 10.11.45.0/255.255.255.0. The all-inclusive /16 route will match at a lower priority in the client's routing table than the client's private /24 subnet, so both subnets can coexist on the client. The 10.11.45.0/255.255.255.0 subnet will match on any of the client's local traffic, while packets directed to 10.11.x.y will get routed back to the server when x is not equal to 45. James
[Openvpn-devel] Connect several subnets with OpenVPN2.0
Hi list, I have a kind of "problem" here. I thought about connecting several subnets with 2.0 and for this purpose use the PUSH/PULL-Options. So I used options like push "route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0" push "route 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0" To push all known subnets to the Clients. But the problem is, if I push route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 to the Client which "owns" this subnet it overwrites the old routing entry and kicks its Subnet. My recommendation would be a kind of exception list. Something like push "route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0" except common-name What do you think about this, is there any other (good to administrate) solution? Kind regards, Robin Wenninger P.S. (Right me when I'm wrong.)
