hi!
My plan is that the initial version of the forking daemon will follow the
current OpenVPN model of one process, port, and tun/tap dev for each tunnel,
why one (server) port for each tunnel?
each time i have to configure ftp, h323, or similar <bleeep> thru a firewall i become depressive. why repeat mankind's sins over and
over...
but ease the configuration by automating the instantiation of tunnel processes
on a demand basis.
if you really want to ease things: let there at least be the possibility for the server to receive all connections for all tunnels
on the same port...
Eventually, if we need to implement tun/tap sharing between tunnels, we will
need a userspace routing/firewalling library.
hm, did you understand my idea of simply using an arp library instead?
regards,
Chris
____________________________________________
Openvpn-users mailing list
Openvpn-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-users
|