Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

route statements misinterpreted #85

Closed
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Mar 19, 2015 · 3 comments
Closed

route statements misinterpreted #85

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Mar 19, 2015 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link

What steps will reproduce the problem?

My configuration creates a default route to the VPN then adds a few exceptions 
by using lines like:

route 101.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 net_gateway default

Unfortunately the OpenVPN app rewrites these to:

route 101.0.0.0 255.0.0.0

Which is the equivalent of:

route 101.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 vpn_gateway

Which is the opposite of the original statement.


What is the expected output? What do you see instead?

Expected: routes that are an exception to the default route. 
What do I see: routes that (redundantly) match the default route.

What mobile phone are you using?

Samsung S3.

Which Android Version and stock ROM or aftermarket like cyanogenmod?

Android 4.1.1 stock.


Original issue reported on code.google.com by [email protected] on 31 Aug 2012 at 1:03

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Yes the current behavior is wrong but I can only add positive routes with the 
VPNService API.

I will add a warning that routes that are which do not use the VPN are not 
supported. 

One could split the defualt in many small routes that exclude the routes with 
net_gateway but I don't know if that is a good approach.

Original comment by [email protected] on 31 Aug 2012 at 1:16

  • Changed state: Accepted

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Thanks. Will try and see how that works out.

Original comment by [email protected] on 31 Aug 2012 at 1:49

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Closing because of inactivity

Original comment by [email protected] on 15 Dec 2012 at 8:08

  • Changed state: WontFix

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant