openvpn-devel Mailing List for OpenVPN

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 28/02/11 16:47, Stefan Hellermann wrote: >> >> Thanks a lot for this fix. Good catch! >> >> Applied to bugfix2.1 and merged into allmerged. >> >> commit 4c4b8cedfa98e8892a53eadd154836f8fa8cea7a >> Author: Stefan Hellermann <st...@th...> >> Date: Sun Feb 27 22:15:44 2011 +0100 >> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hellermann <st...@th...> >> Acked-by: David Sommerseth <da...@re...> >> Signed-off-by: David Sommerseth <da...@re...> >> >> >> You asked earlier if this patch was good, and I see you managed to add the >> "Signed-off-by:" line (git commit -s). So this basically looks good to me! > > Sorry, the E-Mail with the Signed-off-by: was a patch v2, the last > changed line has a ";" too much. > The incremental diff: > > --- a/plugin.h > +++ b/plugin.h > @@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ plugin_call (const struct plugin_list *pl, > struct plugin_return *pr, > struct env_set *es, > int current_cert_depth, > - X509 *current_cert); > + X509 *current_cert) Gah! I managed to somehow mix stuff up. Sorry about that. I've applied a new commit with this patch with you as the author and Signed-off-by. I'm sorry about that mess. Even though I did a 'make distcheck' without failures. But I might have missed a warning. For patches which replaces earlier ones, please emphasize what the difference is, then it easier to see that I work with the proper patches. commit 2b7e41f39f54b68b515c9aa9053ca07bf54974a8 Author: Stefan Hellermann <st...@th...> Date: Mon Feb 28 16:53:26 2011 +0100 Fixed typo in plugin.h A additional ';' had sneaked in commit 4c4b8cedfa98e8892a53. Lets kick it out again. Signed-off-by: Stefan Hellermann <st...@th...> Acked-by: David Sommerseth <da...@re...> Signed-off-by: David Sommerseth <da...@re...> Kind regards, David Sommerseth -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk1rxsIACgkQDC186MBRfro6RACfcuzzJ5b/kVXqMqLDJ6CPKQhF /cwAnigYwfBBG1O1thR2kOqiVUoy21sr =zN1n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 28/02/11 15:40, Stefan Hellermann wrote: > Am 28.02.2011 15:23, schrieb Stefan Hellermann: >> Am 28.02.2011 09:08, schrieb Samuli Seppänen: >>> Hi Stefan, >>> >>> I think you should rebase your patch against the "beta2.2" branch. No >>> development is done in the "allmerged" branch, it only used to aggregate >>> code from other branches. >>> >> The commit which introduces this build-failure is in the bugfix2.1 >> branch. Could you apply it there and merge the patch to allmerged? >> >> Otherwise the weekly snapshots linked on >> https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/TesterDocumentation >> do not build in the !ENABLE_PLUGIN case. >> >> The router distribution Openwrt is using these. >> > > plugin.h: update prototype of plugin_call dummy in !ENABLE_PLUGIN case [v2] > > Commit 2db5a0ac3e053857d97e468de53e70a605f54561 adds two arguments to > plugin_call(...), but missed the !ENABLE_PLUGIN case. With > !ENABLE_PLUGIN, plugin_call(...) is only a dummy, so add these two > parameters there too. > > --- > plugin.h | 4 +++- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > There is a small copy-paste failure in the patch, the correct one below. > This one is now really run-time tested. > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Hellermann <st...@th...> ACK! Thanks a lot for this fix. Good catch! Applied to bugfix2.1 and merged into allmerged. commit 4c4b8cedfa98e8892a53eadd154836f8fa8cea7a Author: Stefan Hellermann <st...@th...> Date: Sun Feb 27 22:15:44 2011 +0100 Signed-off-by: Stefan Hellermann <st...@th...> Acked-by: David Sommerseth <da...@re...> Signed-off-by: David Sommerseth <da...@re...> You asked earlier if this patch was good, and I see you managed to add the "Signed-off-by:" line (git commit -s). So this basically looks good to me! kind regards, David Sommerseth -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk1rwdEACgkQDC186MBRfrq+9gCdGgk78cFkcXo+Oc1yEFi7Y5l0 SDkAni0Oa4lDyvK/9OrIwOAIeaEWFpVT =RoHL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 

Am 28.02.2011 15:23, schrieb Stefan Hellermann: > Am 28.02.2011 09:08, schrieb Samuli Seppänen: >> Hi Stefan, >> >> I think you should rebase your patch against the "beta2.2" branch. No >> development is done in the "allmerged" branch, it only used to aggregate >> code from other branches. >> > The commit which introduces this build-failure is in the bugfix2.1 > branch. Could you apply it there and merge the patch to allmerged? > > Otherwise the weekly snapshots linked on > https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/TesterDocumentation > do not build in the !ENABLE_PLUGIN case. > > The router distribution Openwrt is using these. > plugin.h: update prototype of plugin_call dummy in !ENABLE_PLUGIN case [v2] Commit 2db5a0ac3e053857d97e468de53e70a605f54561 adds two arguments to plugin_call(...), but missed the !ENABLE_PLUGIN case. With !ENABLE_PLUGIN, plugin_call(...) is only a dummy, so add these two parameters there too. --- plugin.h | 4 +++- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) There is a small copy-paste failure in the patch, the correct one below. This one is now really run-time tested. Signed-off-by: Stefan Hellermann <st...@th...> diff --git a/plugin.h b/plugin.h index 846973f..9d48651 100644 --- a/plugin.h +++ b/plugin.h @@ -174,7 +174,9 @@ plugin_call (const struct plugin_list *pl, const int type, const struct argv *av, struct plugin_return *pr, - struct env_set *es) + struct env_set *es, + int current_cert_depth, + X509 *current_cert) { return 0; } -- 1.7.4 

Am 28.02.2011 09:08, schrieb Samuli Seppänen: > >> plugin.h: update prototype of plugin_call dummy in !ENABLE_PLUGIN case >> >> Commit 2db5a0ac3e053857d97e468de53e70a605f54561 adds two arguments to >> plugin_call(...), but missed the !ENABLE_PLUGIN case. With >> !ENABLE_PLUGIN, plugin_call(...) is only a dummy, so add these two >> parameters there too. >> >> --- >> plugin.h | 4 +++- >> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >> >> This is my first patch with git, is everything correct? This patch is >> against the allmerged branch. >> >> > Hi Stefan, > > I think you should rebase your patch against the "beta2.2" branch. No > development is done in the "allmerged" branch, it only used to aggregate > code from other branches. > The commit which introduces this build-failure is in the bugfix2.1 branch. Could you apply it there and merge the patch to allmerged? Otherwise the weekly snapshots linked on https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/TesterDocumentation do not build in the !ENABLE_PLUGIN case. The router distribution Openwrt is using these. Regards, Stefan 

David Sommerseth wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 26/02/11 12:25, Gert Doering wrote: > | Hi, > | > | On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 11:19:19AM +0000, Olivier Van Acker wrote: > |>> The code parts in question inside OpenVPN (socket.c) are somewhat > |>> complicated due to lots of existing options and lots of existing > |>> operating systems being supported, so this will not be a trivial > |>> task. > |> > |> Would it be a good idea to limit the scope of this project by concentrating > |> on one OS first? I was thinking FreeBSD first since that contains the > |> reference implementation of SCTP. > | > | Well, you'd certainly start with one OS, but in the long run, you'd want > | the mainstream OSes (Linux and Windows) as well... > > I second this. SCTP is really interesting for OpenVPN in my perspective, but > we should rather quickly after having "something which works" support other > OSes as well. When we reach that point, merging SCTP support into 'allmerged' > for broader testing gets interesting. If Linux gets support quickly, I'm able > to test this out pretty soonish in a limited prod environment. > > Some practical details. General info about the development process can be > found here: > <https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/DeveloperDocumentation>, including > git repositories. > > For the git branch to look at, JJO's IPv6 transport patches is called > feat_ipv6_transport. *But* as soon as we manage to get the OpenVPN 2.2 > release out the door (I'm hope I'll be able to finalise the beta2.2 branch > today for the RC release), we're going to merge stuff, including JJO's branch > and Gert's feat_ipv6_payload branches officially and get started with the > OpenVPN 2.3 cycle. So what I'm saying, please base your stuff on JJO's branch > now, but be sure your changes can be merged against the feat_ipv6_payload > branch too. As I'm the one going to do the merges, I'm going to be noisy if > it doesn't go smooth ;-) > > And just let me state that, if someone got time to do a real overhaul of > socket.c, that would really be beneficial. That source file is confusing at > best to read. However, we do have some source documentation patches is the > wild somewhere, waiting to go in soonish too - which I'd like to see go into > the 2.3 cycle. So - there's a little coordination needed to be done here with > such an overhaul too. > > there seems to be a freely available SCTP implementation for Windows XP/Vista/7: http://www.bluestop.org/SctpDrv/ Sources for an older version of this driver are available, but I am not sure under what conditions/license is released. As for adding SCTP support: if I read the 'socat' sources it should be dead-easy: just open the socket using the protocol IPP_SCTP4 and that's about it. The real question is whether we'd want to support some of the niftier features that SCTP has to offer (e.g. opening multiple channels via a single connections). cheers, JJK 

 > plugin.h: update prototype of plugin_call dummy in !ENABLE_PLUGIN case > > Commit 2db5a0ac3e053857d97e468de53e70a605f54561 adds two arguments to > plugin_call(...), but missed the !ENABLE_PLUGIN case. With > !ENABLE_PLUGIN, plugin_call(...) is only a dummy, so add these two > parameters there too. > > --- > plugin.h | 4 +++- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > This is my first patch with git, is everything correct? This patch is > against the allmerged branch. > > Hi Stefan, I think you should rebase your patch against the "beta2.2" branch. No development is done in the "allmerged" branch, it only used to aggregate code from other branches. -- Samuli Seppänen Community Manager OpenVPN Technologies, Inc irc freenode net: mattock 

Olivier Van Acker wrote: > I might start with Linux first since, as you rightly point out, > more people can use/test it. I'd be happy to test it too. //Peter