Re: nm-openswan is alive again!

[Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com>]

On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 23:34 +0200, Tomáš Hnyk wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 01:46:15 +0200, Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 18:03 -0400, steve wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Just a quick post to inform anyone who cares, that I've finished my
> >> employment transition, re-created my development environment and I've
> >> re-started work on the openswan vpn plugin.
> >>
> >> I've made two design changes to allow for multiple concurrent vpn
> >> connections (in future releases) as it will be required for my new job.
> >> I'll post again when I've got a tar ball for others to test.
> >
> > Awesome!  You might want to look at an email recently sent about a new
> > API for VPNs to see if it would also work for openswan.
> >
> > "Proposal for a new VPN DBUS interface" - May 8th
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >> If anyone feels inclined to help with the effort (which is mainly bug
> >> fixing at this point), feel free to contact me.
> >>
> >> Steve.
> Does this also mean that it will possible to use VPN even if the network  
> connection is not managed through NM but is set to static as described  
> here:  
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/115750 - or  
> is that only Ubuntu thing?

NM by definition won't know (and therefore won't care) about connections
that aren't know to NM.  That's as it should be.  On the other hand, the
configuration information will soon be flexible enough to deal with most
of the cases, but that's already mostly the case for VPNs.

Dan