Re: NM gets it wrong

[Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com>]

On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 19:06 +0100, Tim Niemueller wrote:
> Dan Williams wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Right, this is all an artifact of the vpnc implementation.  In vpnc, the
> > PtP and local address are the same.  This was something only a second
> > VPN implementation could find :)
> > 
> > The NMIP4Config structure doesn't have an entry for PtP addresses.
> > We'll likely need to add one and also augment the vpn-service -> NM API
> > to deal with that, so that each individual vpn service can do what it
> > wants to with that.  Which variable is the "server" address that gets
> > passed from OpenVPN to your helper?  Is it VPNGATEWAY?
> 
> Yes, it's VPNGATEWAY. The local IP address is stored in ip4_address.
> Even if the local IP and the remote are the same for VPN, why is it not
> sufficient to have the ip4_gateway set to the remote gateway and
> ip4_address to the local address? What are the semantics of these fields?

That's what it does.  But where things go wrong is in
NetworkManagerSystem.c, nm_system_vpn_device_set_from_ip4_config() where
we actually set the addresses on the interface.  What we should be doing
is adding a ptp field in NMIP4Config and passing that in from the VPN
service daemon then honoring that field in NetworkManagerSystem.c.

Dan