On 10/25/2010 7:54 AM, Jim Pingle wrote:
> On 10/25/2010 4:15 AM, Ermal Luçi wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 6:31 AM, Chris Buechler <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Adam Thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Using 2.0 from a few days ago…
>>>>
>>>> In the OpenVPN setup, I can (must) choose which interface each OpenVPN
>>>> server is listening on.  I must also choose a local port number to bind to.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If I’m binding a specific port to a specific interface, why can’t I reuse
>>>> the same port# on another interface?
>>>>
>>>> (I tried, the gui complains that the local port is already in use.  Which 
>>>> is
>>>> true, but – I think – shouldn’t matter if it’s bound to specific
>>>> interfaces.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> The management interface, which binds to 127.0.0.1, also uses that
>>> port, which can't be re-used. I'd rather work around that in a
>>> different fashion in the future, but that's rife with possibilities
>>> for introducing bugs, and it's not broken, so it's not going to change
>>> for 2.0.
>>>
>>
>> This is not true. The management interafce is a unix domain socket now.
>> And that is only a bug of th eweb interface!
>> I thought that Jim fixed that at some point.
> 
> I probably mentioned it but I don't think I had actually fixed it yet. I
> thought there was still a ticket or todo out there at some point with a
> note to fix it after the UNIX socket conversion. It should be OK to do
> now we just need to make sure the input validation is smart enough to
> reject only if there isn't an interface-specific conflict (or if one has
> chosen 'any' interface)
> 
> Shouldn't take much to fix.

There is still an open ticket, but with a target of "Future" not 2.0:
http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/814

Jim

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org

Reply via email to