From patchwork Fri Feb 4 04:45:04 2022 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Antonio Quartulli X-Patchwork-Id: 2266 Return-Path: Delivered-To: patchwork@openvpn.net Delivered-To: patchwork@openvpn.net Received: from director11.mail.ord1d.rsapps.net ([172.28.255.1]) by backend41.mail.ord1d.rsapps.net with LMTP id cHvoHC1K/WEqcAAAqwncew (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 04 Feb 2022 10:45:49 -0500 Received: from proxy3.mail.ord1c.rsapps.net ([172.28.255.1]) by director11.mail.ord1d.rsapps.net with LMTP id +KKWNy1K/WE1DwAAvGGmqA (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 04 Feb 2022 10:45:49 -0500 Received: from smtp2.gate.ord1c ([172.28.255.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by proxy3.mail.ord1c.rsapps.net with LMTPS id KNAlNy1K/WHeQgAANIxBXg (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 04 Feb 2022 10:45:49 -0500 X-Spam-Threshold: 95 X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Virus-Scanned: OK X-Orig-To: openvpnslackdevel@openvpn.net X-Originating-Ip: [216.105.38.7] Authentication-Results: smtp2.gate.ord1c.rsapps.net; iprev=pass policy.iprev="216.105.38.7"; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom="openvpn-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net" smtp.helo="lists.sourceforge.net"; dkim=fail (signature verification failed) header.d=sourceforge.net; dkim=fail (signature verification failed) header.d=sf.net; dmarc=none (p=nil; dis=none) header.from=unstable.cc X-Suspicious-Flag: YES X-Classification-ID: 86060ff6-85d1-11ec-a866-842b2b4e7063-1-1 Received: from [216.105.38.7] ([216.105.38.7:54104] helo=lists.sourceforge.net) by smtp2.gate.ord1c.rsapps.net (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 4.2.38.62370 r(:)) with ESMTPS (cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) id 6A/D6-11140-C2A4DF16; Fri, 04 Feb 2022 10:45:49 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nG0ld-0006VA-FM; Fri, 04 Feb 2022 15:44:56 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nG0la-0006Uz-7q for openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 04 Feb 2022 15:44:53 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version:Message-Id: Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=XdsxOJ1t3P+3045JsKd76fDD/bYCzUdledTRXYmqgTk=; b=SEieEpto6tWkkuaJ08rOWIDg5J bKBlriTPWeMmyG4Gs9Nfi4ipST5sHnexF5LBEqmhOT5PESN4fXWvPjNzlrhEzEB2ed/G25TOeKiJt 98RXyZ4i2C+lhPKD/DNVqV9lChxWEpTZenDxMY8bRsqjsBL6ZpR78pMTgMlMys62TGbc=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version:Message-Id:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From :Sender:Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=XdsxOJ1t3P+3045JsKd76fDD/bYCzUdledTRXYmqgTk=; b=i m9RxEFYsNSeARQ5bkprvWSObc/BIyPF5YNeGgNin6h/ZVVsoTl2o5xu0/UTObxiJtIgfBmVkiDbmR YdybZz1JUaKMgbqYb1hjV4MsYh2pxb+Gc+J7dw6JAI1Fl4FzWDxL/QIzKNEbwPOnZsST9gzm7Zq4y SsB287g2A4LrHRLI=; Received: from s2.neomailbox.net ([5.148.176.60]) by sfi-mx-2.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.94.2) id 1nG0lU-0001Yi-MZ for openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 04 Feb 2022 15:44:51 +0000 From: Antonio Quartulli To: openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2022 16:45:04 +0100 Message-Id: <20220204154504.16830-1-a@unstable.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "util-spamd-1.v13.lw.sourceforge.com", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: README.IPv6 is quite useless because IPv6 is not a second class citizen anymore. Most of the content is "obvious" or explained in the manpage along with other details/options. TODO.IPv6 is old and many implemented things are still reported there for no clear reason. Prune all useless details and keep what seems to still be not implemented. Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 6.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1nG0lU-0001Yi-MZ Subject: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Get rid of README.IPv6 and revamp TODO.IPv6 X-BeenThere: openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Gert Doering , Antonio Quartulli Errors-To: openvpn-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: Inbox README.IPv6 is quite useless because IPv6 is not a second class citizen anymore. Most of the content is "obvious" or explained in the manpage along with other details/options. TODO.IPv6 is old and many implemented things are still reported there for no clear reason. Prune all useless details and keep what seems to still be not implemented. Cc: Gert Doering Signed-off-by: Antonio Quartulli --- I am personally in favour of killing TODO.IPv6 as well and rather document missing features in trac tickets. Thoughts? README.IPv6 | 56 ---------------- TODO.IPv6 | 180 +++------------------------------------------------- 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 227 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 README.IPv6 diff --git a/README.IPv6 b/README.IPv6 deleted file mode 100644 index 18068fee..00000000 --- a/README.IPv6 +++ /dev/null @@ -1,56 +0,0 @@ -Since 2.3.0, OpenVPN officially supports IPv6, and all widely used -patches floating around for older versions have been integrated. - -IPv6 payload support --------------------- - -This is for "IPv6 inside OpenVPN", with server-pushed IPv6 configuration -on the client, and support for IPv6 configuration on the tun/tap interface -from within the openvpn config. - -The code in 2.3.0 supersedes the IPv6 payload patches from Gert Doering, -formerly located at http://www.greenie.net/ipv6/openvpn.html - - -The following options have been added to handle IPv6 configuration, -analogous to their IPv4 counterparts (--server <-> --server-ipv6, etc.) - - - server-ipv6 - - ifconfig-ipv6 - - ifconfig-ipv6-pool - - ifconfig-ipv6-push - - route-ipv6 - - iroute-ipv6 - -see "man openvpn" for details how they are used. - - - -IPv6 transport support ----------------------- - -This is to enable OpenVPN peers or client/servers to talk to each other -over an IPv6 network ("OpenVPN over IPv6"). - -The code in 2.3.0 supersedes the IPv6 transport patches from JuanJo Ciarlante, -formerly located at http://github.com/jjo/openvpn-ipv6 - -OpenVPN 2.4.0 includes a big overhaul of the IPv6 transport patches -originally implemented for the Android client (ics-openvpn) - -IPv4/IPv6 transport is automatically is selected when resolving addresses. -Use a 6 or 4 suffix to force IPv6/IPv4: - - --proto udp6 - --proto tcp4 - --proto tcp6-client - --proto tcp4-server - --proto tcp6 --client / --proto tcp6 --server - -On systems that allow IPv4 connections on IPv6 sockets -(all systems supporting IPV6_V6ONLY setsockopt), an OpenVPN server can -handle IPv4 connections on the IPv6 socket as well, making it a true -dual-stacked server. Use bind ipv6only to disable this behaviour. - -On other systems, as of 2.3.0, you need to run separate server instances -for IPv4 and IPv6. diff --git a/TODO.IPv6 b/TODO.IPv6 index 465eaa66..61a76d0a 100644 --- a/TODO.IPv6 +++ b/TODO.IPv6 @@ -1,93 +1,7 @@ TODO for IPv6 payload support ----------------------------- -1.) "--topology subnet" doesn't work together with IPv6 payload on FreeBSD - (verified for FreeBSD server, Linux/ifconfig client, problems - with ICMP6 neighbor solicitations from BSD not being answered by Linux) - - * 2012-01-22 fixed in platform cleanup, commit 62c613d46dc495d74 - -2.) NetBSD IPv6 support doesn't work - ("connected" route is not auto-created, "route-ipv6" adding fails) - - * fixed, 3.1.10 * - -3.) route deletion for IPv6 routes is not yet done - - * fixed for configured routes, 3.1.10 * - * missing for manual-ifconfig-connected (NetBSD, Darwin, Win32) - - * 2012-06-10 - fixed somewhere in 2010 - -4.) do "ifconfig tun0 inet6 unplumb" or "ifconfig tun0 destroy" for - Solaris, *BSD, ... at program termination time, to clean up leftovers - (unless tunnel persistence is desired). - - For Solaris, only the "ipv6 tun0" is affected, for the *BSDs all tun0 - stay around. - - * 2012-06-10 - fixed in individual platform cleanups early-2012 - -4a.) deconfigure IPv6 on tun interface on session termination, otherwise - one could end up with something like this (on NetBSD): - -tun0: flags=8051 mtu 1500 - inet 10.9.0.18 -> 10.9.0.17 netmask 0xffffffff - inet6 fe80::a00:20ff:fece:d299%tun0 -> prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x3 - inet6 2001:608:4:eff::2000:3 -> prefixlen 64 - inet6 2001:608:4:eff::1:3 -> prefixlen 64 - - (pool was changed, previous address still active on tun0, breakage) - - * semi-fixed for NetBSD, 28.2.10, always do tun0 destroy / tun0 create - before actual ifconfig -- tunnel still lingers after OpenVPN quits - - * 2011-09-16 fixed in platform cleanup, commit 8ca19c014c149cf69 - -4b.) verify this - on FreeBSD, tun0 is auto-destroyed if created by - opening /dev/tun (and lingers if created by "ifconfig tun0 create") - - -> use for persistent tunnels on not-linux? - - * 2012-06-10 tun interface behaviour is documented in "man tun(4)" - -5.) add new option "ifconfig-ipv6-push" - (per-client static IPv6 assignment, -> radiusplugin, etc) - - * implemented, 14.1.10 * - -6.) add new option "route-ipv6-gateway" - - * 2012-06-09 - decided there is no current need (but fairly trivial) - -7.) add "full" gateway handling for IPv6 in route.c - (right now, the routes are just sent down the tun interface, if the - operating system in questions supports that, without care for the - gateway address - which does not work for gateways that are supposed - to point elsewhere. Also, it doesn't work for TAP interfaces. - - * 2012-06-09 use "dev tun" for tun devices, "via $gateway" for tap - (and purposely do not support off-link routes) - -8.) full IPv6 support for TAP interfaces - (main issue should be routes+gateway - and testing :-) ) - - test 2010/09/24: TAP itself works on linux/ifconfig+iproute2, but - route-via-tap doesn't work at all (route points to "tap0" which fails) - -17:51:14.075412 fe:ab:6e:c5:53:71 > 33:33:ff:00:00:01, ethertype IPv6 (0x86dd), length 86: 2001:608:4:a053::1:0 > ff02::1:ff00:1: ICMP6, neighbor solicitation, who has 2001:608:4:a001::1, length 32 - - * 2012-06-09 missing gateway support implemented - -8a.) - how is iroute-via-tap supposed to work?? - - * 2012-06-10 - answer: not at all, OpenVPN doesn't do "iroute" in - tap mode - set up "route-ipv6" with gateway address = individual - client's tap0 address to get the per-client routes - - -9.) verify that iroute-ipv6 and route-ipv6 interact in the same way as +1.) verify that iroute-ipv6 and route-ipv6 interact in the same way as documented for iroute/route: A's subnet, OpenVPN must push this route to all clients @@ -96,94 +10,26 @@ tun0: flags=8051 mtu 1500 not pushing a route to a client if it matches one of the client's iroutes. -10.) extend "ifconfig-ipv6" to handle specification of /netbits, pushing - of /netbits, and correctly ifconfig'ing this - (default, if not specified: /64) - - * done * 2012-02-03 - -11.) do not add ipv6-routes if tun-ipv6 is not set - complain instead - - * done * 12.1.10 - -12.) handle incoming [::] and [fe80:...] packets in tun-p2mp MULTI mode - (most likely those are DAD packets) - silently ignore DAD? - Or accept-and-forward iff (multicast && client2client)? - handle NS/NA - -13.) from Martin List-Petersen: - - One thing, and I guess this requires modifications in - network-manager-openvpn: It also works, BUT ignores "push - route-ipv6-gateway" and "push route-ipv6 ...." (obviously routes pushed - from the server) entirely. - -14.) from ##openvpn-discussion: - - new features should be #ifdef'ed - - (check whether this is feasible at all) - -15.) IPv6 related environment variables +2.) handle incoming [::] and [fe80:...] packets in tun-p2mp MULTI mode + (most likely those are DAD packets) + silently ignore DAD? + Or accept-and-forward iff (multicast && client2client)? + handle NS/NA +3.) IPv6 related environment variables - document all of them in openvpn.8 - make sure that all existing IPv4 stuff has IPv6 counterparts -16.) OpenBSD - - implement ifconfig/route for IPv6 - - revert ifconfig/open_tun order to "normal" (separate commit!!!) - (openvpn-devel, Subject: OpenBSD) - - test - - * 2012-02-05 platform cleanup, commit 82d4e12068774b0a6ca - -17.) client-option (Elwood) - - ignore-v6-push-options yes/no - - ignore-v6-route-push ("as for IPv4 routes") - -18.) fail-save? "what if 'ip -6 addr add' fails" -> fail, or fallback to v4? - (-> recomment setting "ignore-v6-push-options yes") - -19.) safety check: if connecting over IPv6 (v6 transport) and the pushed +4.) safety check: if connecting over IPv6 (v6 transport) and the pushed route-ipv6 network encompasses the server IPv6 address, make sure we at least log a warning (until we can fiddle with external routing to make this work correctly). -20.) show "route add" / "route delete" commands for IPv6 in log file - (we show the "ifconfig" commands, so why not the routes?) - - 2010-08-07: this is a null-feature - it's already there, but with - different debug level (M_INFO vs. D_ROUTE) so user - didn't notice - -21.) enable ipv6-only server operations - - decouple ipv6 pool handling from ipv4 pool - - make sure Rest of OpenVPN doesn't assume "there will always be IPv4" - -22.) implement --learn-address for IPv6 - -23.) FreeBSD 8 seems to require explicit setting of the "ifconfig" IPv6 - route, while FreeBSD 6+7 don't --> more testing, and code fix - - workaround for the time being: just add - - server-ipv6 2001:608:4:a051::/64 - route-ipv6 2001:608:4:a051::/64 - - to the config - - (problem + workaround applies both to tun and tap style devices) - - * 2012-06-09 - this got fixed in one of the platform cleanups - - - TODO for IPv6 transport support ------------------------------- -[ Last updated: 2014-01-03. ] +[ Last updated: 2022-02-04. ] * All platforms: o mgmt console: as currently passes straight in_addr_t bits around @@ -193,14 +39,6 @@ TODO for IPv6 transport support Hard: requires deep changes in initialization/calling logic - Done by dual stack patches - o use AI_PASSIVE - - Done by dual stack patches - - o the getaddr()/getaddr6() interface is not prepared for handling socktype - "tagging", currently I abuse the sockflags bits for getting the ai_socktype - downstream. - - Still done by flags, seems clean enough. - o implement comparison for mapped addresses: server in dual stack listening IPv6 must permit incoming streams from allowed IPv4 peer, currently you need to pass eg: --remote ffff::1.2.3.4