Re: [Openvpn-users] Linux(server) <-> W2K(client) all working fine except Samba

["James Yonan" <jim@xxxxxxxxx>]

Massimiliano Hofer <max@xxxxxxxxxx> said:

> Alle 2:21 PM, domenica 7 dicembre 2003, Jordi Sanfeliu ha scritto:
> 
> > Using tcpdump on the Linux side I see something strange. I dont know why
> > the w2k have the IP 169.254.74.152. Executing "route print" in the w2k as a
> > command line I get all the routing table that includes this strange IP.
> 
> I had the same problem: samba not working, other IP services working and wrong 
> IP on the tun device (I wasn't bridging).
> In my case an "ipconfig" revealed a second (and wrong) IP associated to the 
> tun device (it doesn't show immediately, it appears magically after a few 
> seconds).

That's the "autoconfiguration" address which Windows gives to adapters.  The
device driver has no control over this.

> I think that normal connections (telnet, POP3, etc.) use the "nearest" IP (the 
> primary one for the first device where the connection will be routed), while 
> SMB somhow chooses differently and uses the spurious one.

> I resolved the problema adding "ip-win32 manual" to the configuration and 
> manually configuring the IP, but I think it's a bug of the Win32 
> implementation.

The problem is that Windows lacks an API for setting the IP addresses of
adapters.  The two methods presented are the IP helper API (ipapi) and netsh,
and neither solve the problem 100%.

The IP helper API (ipapi) only adds a secondary address to an adapter, not a
primary address.  So if the primary address is undefined, Windows tries to
give the bogus "autoconfiguration" address to it.  That's why you see a second
address popping up.

You can get away from this difficulty by using netsh instead of ipapi
(--ip-win32 netsh).  But once again, netsh is buggy on some platforms.

If anyone figures out a way to programmatically set TCP/IP properties on an
adapter that really works on Windows, let me know.

> Another problem I had is that the "route" option always fails if applied 
> without a dalay (interface not ready) and that the interface never comes 
> alive if I don't send packets to it (even if I use the "ping" option).
> 
> My temporary solution was to add "delay-route 1" and an up script that pings 
> the peer.

You need the ping option on both sides of the connection, and the connection
establishment will occur when each side receives the ping from the other side.
 Then you can have a route-delay option to time the activation of the route
directives relative to the point of connection establishment.

James


____________________________________________
Openvpn-users mailing list
Openvpn-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-users