• Where to get the sources (openconnect) ?

    From Markus Robert Kessler@no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Mon Apr 1 18:35:49 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    Hi all,

    I am running several machines for connecting to our company intranet,
    using openconnect VPN.

    So far, it works. But:

    The debian based systems, i.e. Ubuntu 23.10 and Raspbian OS show up
    hundreds of routes after connect. And it's clear that they are brought to
    my client via server-initiated 'push route ...' command.

    Some of these routes are conflicting with machines in my home office net.

    So, I'd like to skip getting such a huge amount of useless routes. I want
    to set the routing by my own script, instead.

    The funny thing is that a Redhat-based OS, Mageia 9 (64 and 32 bit), does
    not behave like this, instead only the default route (10.0.0.0/8) is sent through tun0.

    So, maybe this is a matter of compilation?

    Or something else to look after, to prevent openconnect from doing this?

    Maybe someone can give a hint where to download the openconnect sources
    for Ubuntu?

    Thanks in advance!

    Best regards,

    Markus
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Marco Moock@mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Mon Apr 1 20:56:45 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 01.04.2024 um 18:35 Uhr Markus Robert Kessler wrote:

    I am running several machines for connecting to our company intranet,
    using openconnect VPN.

    Invoked directly or via NetworkManager?

    So far, it works. But:

    The debian based systems, i.e. Ubuntu 23.10 and Raspbian OS show up
    hundreds of routes after connect. And it's clear that they are
    brought to my client via server-initiated 'push route ...' command.

    Some of these routes are conflicting with machines in my home office
    net.

    So, I'd like to skip getting such a huge amount of useless routes. I
    want to set the routing by my own script, instead.

    NetworkManager has an option to ignore routes from the peer.
    Connection settings --> IPv4/IPv6 settings --> Routes --> Ignore
    automatically obtained routes

    The funny thing is that a Redhat-based OS, Mageia 9 (64 and 32 bit),
    does not behave like this, instead only the default route
    (10.0.0.0/8) is sent through tun0.

    This is not a default route and if they don't add the routes from the
    VPN server, this is either a setting or a serious bug.

    Maybe someone can give a hint where to download the openconnect
    sources for Ubuntu?

    If you really need them:
    https://www.infradead.org/openconnect/download.html
    --
    kind regards
    Marco

    Send spam to 1711989349muell@cartoonies.org

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Markus Robert Kessler@no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Mon Apr 1 19:30:21 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 20:56:45 +0200 Marco Moock wrote:

    On 01.04.2024 um 18:35 Uhr Markus Robert Kessler wrote:

    I am running several machines for connecting to our company intranet,
    using openconnect VPN.

    Invoked directly or via NetworkManager?

    Directly

    So far, it works. But:

    The debian based systems, i.e. Ubuntu 23.10 and Raspbian OS show up
    hundreds of routes after connect. And it's clear that they are brought
    to my client via server-initiated 'push route ...' command.

    Some of these routes are conflicting with machines in my home office
    net.

    So, I'd like to skip getting such a huge amount of useless routes. I
    want to set the routing by my own script, instead.

    NetworkManager has an option to ignore routes from the peer. Connection settings --> IPv4/IPv6 settings --> Routes --> Ignore automatically
    obtained routes

    Looks promising! Thanks!

    So, openconnect does have a (commandline) option, which network manager invokes to get rid of those routing infos?

    I didn't find this switch in the man page yet. Do you know its name?

    Thanks again!

    Best regards,

    Markus
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Jim Jackson@jj@franjam.org.uk to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Mon Apr 1 19:54:54 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 2024-04-01, Markus Robert Kessler <no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de> wrote:
    So, maybe this is a matter of compilation?

    Or something else to look after, to prevent openconnect from doing this?

    Maybe someone can give a hint where to download the openconnect sources
    for Ubuntu?

    As long as you have the deb-src lines in your /etc/apt/sources.list etc
    Then for any package

    apt-get source package-name

    gets you the source that was used to compile the binaries in the package.

    e.g. see https://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/how-to-get-source-code-of-package-using-the-apt-command-on-debian-or-ubuntu/

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Marco Moock@mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Mon Apr 1 22:16:13 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 01.04.2024 um 19:30 Uhr Markus Robert Kessler wrote:

    So, openconnect does have a (commandline) option, which network
    manager invokes to get rid of those routing infos?

    I dunno.

    I didn't find this switch in the man page yet. Do you know its name?

    Sadly, no.
    I currently have to invoke openconnect directly because they don't
    support TOTP properly yet and it is PITA.
    I recommend invoking it via NM whenever possible.
    --
    kind regards
    Marco

    Send spam to 1711992621muell@cartoonies.org

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From William Unruh@unruh@invalid.ca to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Tue Apr 2 14:57:42 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 2024-04-01, Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    On 01.04.2024 um 19:30 Uhr Markus Robert Kessler wrote:

    So, openconnect does have a (commandline) option, which network
    manager invokes to get rid of those routing infos?

    I dunno.

    I didn't find this switch in the man page yet. Do you know its name?

    Sadly, no.
    I currently have to invoke openconnect directly because they don't
    support TOTP properly yet and it is PITA.
    I recommend invoking it via NM whenever possible.

    If you run openconnect on its own (no argument) it lists its options, so
    is like a very brief man page but presumable up-to-date.


    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From scott@scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Tue Apr 2 16:23:44 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    In article <uuf01e$2lb63$1@dont-email.me>,
    Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    On 01.04.2024 um 18:35 Uhr Markus Robert Kessler wrote:
    So, I'd like to skip getting such a huge amount of useless routes. I
    want to set the routing by my own script, instead.

    NetworkManager has an option to ignore routes from the peer.
    Connection settings --> IPv4/IPv6 settings --> Routes --> Ignore >automatically obtained routes

    The Cisco ASA at work pushes some routes to my computer when I connect to
    it. One of them (for a remote office) uses the same 192.168.1.0/24 subnet
    as my home network, so I lose access to my file server, printers, etc. at
    home when I'm connected to the VPN. I'd been considering moving my home network to a different subnet, but this would be easier...will have to look into it.

    I'd still need a route to 172.16.0.0/22. Would this have to be added
    manually after connecting?
    --
    _/_
    / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
    (IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
    \_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From William Unruh@unruh@invalid.ca to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Tue Apr 2 22:16:53 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 2024-04-02, Scott Alfter <scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote:
    In article <uuf01e$2lb63$1@dont-email.me>,
    Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    On 01.04.2024 um 18:35 Uhr Markus Robert Kessler wrote:
    So, I'd like to skip getting such a huge amount of useless routes. I
    want to set the routing by my own script, instead.

    NetworkManager has an option to ignore routes from the peer.
    Connection settings --> IPv4/IPv6 settings --> Routes --> Ignore >>automatically obtained routes

    The Cisco ASA at work pushes some routes to my computer when I connect to
    it. One of them (for a remote office) uses the same 192.168.1.0/24 subnet
    as my home network, so I lose access to my file server, printers, etc. at home when I'm connected to the VPN. I'd been considering moving my home network to a different subnet, but this would be easier...will have to look into it.

    ?? 192.168.x.x is non-routable. Ie, unless you are directly connected to
    the network you cannot access it. Is your home on the same physical net
    as that remote office? Otherwise I do not see how tht could do anything
    to your attachment to the home network.

    I'd still need a route to 172.16.0.0/22. Would this have to be added manually after connecting?

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Markus Robert Kessler@no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 3 08:46:47 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:16:53 -0000 (UTC) William Unruh wrote:

    On 2024-04-02, Scott Alfter <scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote:
    In article <uuf01e$2lb63$1@dont-email.me>,
    Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    On 01.04.2024 um 18:35 Uhr Markus Robert Kessler wrote:
    So, I'd like to skip getting such a huge amount of useless routes. I
    want to set the routing by my own script, instead.

    NetworkManager has an option to ignore routes from the peer. Connection >>>settings --> IPv4/IPv6 settings --> Routes --> Ignore automatically >>>obtained routes

    The Cisco ASA at work pushes some routes to my computer when I connect
    to it. One of them (for a remote office) uses the same 192.168.1.0/24
    subnet as my home network, so I lose access to my file server,
    printers, etc. at home when I'm connected to the VPN. I'd been
    considering moving my home network to a different subnet, but this
    would be easier...will have to look into it.

    ?? 192.168.x.x is non-routable. Ie, unless you are directly connected to
    the network you cannot access it. Is your home on the same physical net
    as that remote office? Otherwise I do not see how tht could do anything
    to your attachment to the home network.

    I'd still need a route to 172.16.0.0/22. Would this have to be added
    manually after connecting?


    Since 172.16.* is part of the private space beyond the vpn, you have to
    add this like

    ip route add 172.16.0.0/22 dev tun0

    or similar, depending on your vpn device.

    Best regards,

    Markus
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From The Natural Philosopher@tnp@invalid.invalid to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 3 11:22:35 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 02/04/2024 23:16, William Unruh wrote:
    ?? 192.168.x.x is non-routable. Ie, unless you are directly connected to
    the network you cannot access it. Is your home on the same physical net
    as that remote office? Otherwise I do not see how tht could do anything
    to your attachment to the home network.

    192.168.x.x is routable.

    It just isn't something that the Internet routes, by convention.
    It can be routed via a VPN.

    It is a good argument for changing his home IP network to something else.
    --
    A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
    its shoes.

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Tauno Voipio@tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 3 21:26:14 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 2.4.2024 19.23, Scott Alfter wrote:
    In article <uuf01e$2lb63$1@dont-email.me>,
    Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    On 01.04.2024 um 18:35 Uhr Markus Robert Kessler wrote:
    So, I'd like to skip getting such a huge amount of useless routes. I
    want to set the routing by my own script, instead.

    NetworkManager has an option to ignore routes from the peer.
    Connection settings --> IPv4/IPv6 settings --> Routes --> Ignore
    automatically obtained routes

    The Cisco ASA at work pushes some routes to my computer when I connect to
    it. One of them (for a remote office) uses the same 192.168.1.0/24 subnet
    as my home network, so I lose access to my file server, printers, etc. at home when I'm connected to the VPN. I'd been considering moving my home network to a different subnet, but this would be easier...will have to look into it.

    I'd still need a route to 172.16.0.0/22. Would this have to be added manually after connecting?


    The network 172.16.x.x to 172.31.x.x is one of the RFC1918 ranges
    reserved for private networks, and as such it is non-routable in the
    outside Net. It is probably fine to have inside of the VPN tunnel.
    The same applies to the 192.168.x.x network (and 10.x.x.x).

    The commercial VPNs like Cisco want to disable direct Internet access
    of the client for the duration of the tunnel, to prevent sneak paths
    to/from the public net and the internal tunneled network.
    --

    -Tauno Voipio


    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Marco Moock@mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 3 21:32:37 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 02.04.2024 um 22:16 Uhr William Unruh wrote:

    ?? 192.168.x.x is non-routable.

    It is routable, but won't be routed on the internet.
    You can of course route it through a tunnel like here.
    --
    kind regards
    Marco

    Send spam to 1712089013muell@cartoonies.org

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Marco Moock@mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 3 21:33:48 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 02.04.2024 um 16:23 Uhr Scott Alfter wrote:

    The Cisco ASA at work pushes some routes to my computer when I
    connect to it.

    At least when using NetworkManager, you can control that behavior and
    you can add settings to the connection that special routes will be
    added when VPN comes up and removed when it comes down.

    One of them (for a remote office) uses the same
    192.168.1.0/24 subnet as my home network, so I lose access to my file
    server, printers, etc. at home when I'm connected to the VPN. I'd
    been considering moving my home network to a different subnet, but
    this would be easier...will have to look into it.

    Another reason to move to IPv6 - no more address conflicts.
    --
    kind regards
    Marco

    Send spam to 1712067824muell@cartoonies.org

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Marco Moock@mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 3 21:34:45 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 03.04.2024 um 21:26 Uhr Tauno Voipio wrote:

    The commercial VPNs like Cisco want to disable direct Internet access
    of the client for the duration of the tunnel, to prevent sneak paths
    to/from the public net and the internal tunneled network.

    This can always be overridden at the VPN client, so security must not
    rely on that.
    --
    kind regards
    Marco

    Send spam to 1712172374muell@cartoonies.org

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Grant Taylor@gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 3 19:48:21 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 4/1/24 13:35, Markus Robert Kessler wrote:
    Some of these routes are conflicting with machines in my home office net.

    Try adding more specific / host routes to things on your home network
    via the NIC connecting to your home networking.

    There are also multiple routing tables and policy based routing games
    that can be played.
    --
    Grant. . . .
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Grant Taylor@gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 3 19:53:32 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 4/2/24 17:16, William Unruh wrote:
    ?? 192.168.x.x is non-routable.

    192.168/16 is very much so routABLE.

    It is just not routED on the global Internet (by convention).

    Almost all IPs are routable. It gets very tricky to say why given IPs
    are not capable of being routed. Beyond part of locally attached
    networks and crap software, I can't think of think of any that can't be
    made to be routed.

    Ie, unless you are directly connected to the network you cannot
    access it.

    Lack of a route is very different than the lack of ability to route.

    Is your home on the same physical net as that remote office? Otherwise
    I do not see how tht could do anything to your attachment to the
    home network.

    Do to vagaries of non-deterministic things, it's possible to have a
    route to 192.0.2.0/24 through a VPN as well as through the local NIC. Sometimes the most recent route to be configured is the route that is used.

    Other times VPN clients play with policy based routing such that they
    can intercept things ostensibly for white hat reasons.
    --
    Grant. . . .
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Grant Taylor@gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 3 20:00:17 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 4/3/24 13:26, Tauno Voipio wrote:
    The commercial VPNs like Cisco want to disable direct Internet access
    of the client for the duration of the tunnel, to prevent sneak paths
    to/from the public net and the internal tunneled network.

    That is very likely a configuration option on the VPN concentrator.

    It may default to having the default route go through the VPN.

    Start streaming things through the VPN and causing the VPN concentrator
    to use a lot more bandwidth and the people that configured it may decide
    that they want to change the configuration.
    --
    Grant. . . .
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Grant Taylor@gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 3 20:04:06 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 4/3/24 14:34, Marco Moock wrote:
    This can always be overridden at the VPN client, so security must
    not rely on that.

    I agree that you /should/ be able to override it.

    Though that's predicated on you having sufficient administrative access
    to do so on the client device. Being an unprivileged user on a work
    owned computer makes that difficult.

    I've also used some VPNs that periodically (ever single digit minutes if memory serves) checked the configuration and would disconnect if it was
    not what the admins wanted.
    --
    Grant. . . .
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From William Unruh@unruh@invalid.ca to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Thu Apr 4 03:09:54 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 2024-04-03, Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    On 02.04.2024 um 22:16 Uhr William Unruh wrote:

    ?? 192.168.x.x is non-routable.

    It is routable, but won't be routed on the internet.
    You can of course route it through a tunnel like here.

    But which? He says he has his home network on 192.168. and there is a
    work network on 192.168. but it is a different network (ne home, one
    work) and the work one takes precednce for him. Only one of them can be
    active to his machine. which has to be setup in the routng tables.



    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Grant Taylor@gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 3 22:29:13 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 4/3/24 22:09, William Unruh wrote:
    But which? He says he has his home network on 192.168. and there is a
    work network on 192.168. but it is a different network (ne home, one
    work) and the work one takes precednce for him. Only one of them can
    be active to his machine. which has to be setup in the routng tables.

    Traditional routing, read: non-policy-based-routing, dictates that the
    best route wins. Directly attached routes always trump remote routes.

    So for a remote route to be trumping a directly attached route, policy-based-routing must be in use or something else to override very
    low level routing / networking.
    --
    Grant. . . .
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From jim whitby@mr.spock@spockmnail.net to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Thu Apr 4 05:53:00 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 22:29:13 -0500, Grant Taylor wrote:

    On 4/3/24 22:09, William Unruh wrote:
    But which? He says he has his home network on 192.168. and there is a
    work network on 192.168. but it is a different network (ne home, one
    work) and the work one takes precednce for him. Only one of them can be
    active to his machine. which has to be setup in the routng tables.

    Traditional routing, read: non-policy-based-routing, dictates that the
    best route wins. Directly attached routes always trump remote routes.

    So for a remote route to be trumping a directly attached route, policy-based-routing must be in use or something else to override very
    low level routing / networking.

    Verify the netmask(s) u use. If they are all /24 then a change in local nwtwirk would be easiset change.
    --
    Jim Whitby


    Newborn babies cannot cry tears for at least three weeks. ----------------------
    Mageia release 9 (Official) for x86_64
    6.6.22-server-1.mga9
    ----------------------
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From David W. Hodgins@dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Thu Apr 4 02:26:46 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On Wed, 03 Apr 2024 23:53:00 -0400, jim whitby <mr.spock@spockmnail.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 22:29:13 -0500, Grant Taylor wrote:

    On 4/3/24 22:09, William Unruh wrote:
    But which? He says he has his home network on 192.168. and there is a
    work network on 192.168. but it is a different network (ne home, one
    work) and the work one takes precednce for him. Only one of them can be
    active to his machine. which has to be setup in the routng tables.

    Traditional routing, read: non-policy-based-routing, dictates that the
    best route wins. Directly attached routes always trump remote routes.

    So for a remote route to be trumping a directly attached route,
    policy-based-routing must be in use or something else to override very
    low level routing / networking.

    Verify the netmask(s) u use. If they are all /24 then a change in local nwtwirk would be easiset change.

    Just don't forget to change the shorewall rules.

    Regards, Dave Hodgins
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Bud Frede@frede@mouse-potato.com to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Thu Apr 4 06:29:13 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> writes:

    On 02.04.2024 um 22:16 Uhr William Unruh wrote:

    ?? 192.168.x.x is non-routable.

    It is routable, but won't be routed on the internet.
    You can of course route it through a tunnel like here.

    I always say that the RFC 1918 addresses are "not normally publicly
    routed." :-)

    As you say, they definitely _are_ routable, or a whole lot of home and corporate networks would not be functional.

    I saw a video not too long ago that pointed out that the use of these
    addresses and NAT was made widespread by the Cisco PIX. It was a pretty interesting look back at something new that now seems commonplace and
    ordinary.


    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From William Unruh@unruh@invalid.ca to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Thu Apr 4 15:43:33 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 2024-04-04, Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
    Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> writes:

    On 02.04.2024 um 22:16 Uhr William Unruh wrote:

    ?? 192.168.x.x is non-routable.

    It is routable, but won't be routed on the internet.
    You can of course route it through a tunnel like here.

    I always say that the RFC 1918 addresses are "not normally publicly
    routed." :-)

    As you say, they definitely _are_ routable, or a whole lot of home and corporate networks would not be functional.

    The key word is "publicly". Ie, once you get away from directly attached networks (or internal routers you have specially set up within your organization) and some outside router needs to be involved to get the
    packet from here to there, then that router has no idea which of the
    millions of networks with 192.168. to send the packet to.
    In the case in question, there are two networks with the same 192.168.
    network addresses. As mentioned the locally attached network should get
    the nod. The claim is that it is not. Of course this is going by tun to
    remote vpn. So if the local 192.168. addresses are being set up so that
    those packets still get delivered through tun, then the "localy attached network" could well be the remote one. Answer, tell your local machine
    to deliver all 192.168 stuff not to tun but to a local router which
    knows about your local 192.168.


    I saw a video not too long ago that pointed out that the use of these addresses and NAT was made widespread by the Cisco PIX. It was a pretty interesting look back at something new that now seems commonplace and ordinary.


    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Grant Taylor@gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Thu Apr 4 21:43:35 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 4/4/24 01:26, David W. Hodgins wrote:
    Just don't forget to change the shorewall rules.

    You might not even need to do that.

    Add two /25 routes using the local network. The shorewall, bein on a
    separate system than the problematic VPN client, is probably perfectly
    fine continuing to use the /24.

    N.B. it's late at night and I'm not sure what will happen with broadcasts.

    I'm confident that this can be made to work. Especially with host (/32) routes.
    --
    Grant. . . .
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Markus Robert Kessler@no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Tue Apr 9 19:19:08 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    Hello all,

    here is what I've done in short:

    First I wrote to openconnect mailinglist and got an email back, just recommending to install "vpn-slice" instead.
    This was not an answer to my question.

    Next, after analyzing openconnect's behaviour, I found out that this one
    does nothing about manipulating routing etc. This is solely done by "vpnc- script", which is directly invoked from openconnect. And, hence, it
    inherits all the env variables, which are not visible from outside.

    So, I created a new "vpnc-script" file with content

    #!/usr/bin/sh
    env | sort

    and set a symlink, so that openconnect invoked this one now. (Done in foreground mode, i.e. no -b on commandline).

    Watching its output I saw the more than hundred routes which are
    transferred to the client via server-side "route push..." command.

    They are stored in ${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_ADDR}, and their total number,
    i.e. the vector size is stored in $CISCO_SPLIT_EXC.

    To prevent openconnect from accepting all that trash, I could easily set
    this vector to empty, i.e. include

    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC=''

    as one the first commands in vpnc-script file, and, that's it!

    The reason why Suse's approach, which I took to build my own vpnc rpm
    from, and from which vpnc-script is taken from, does not accept all that routes, is that in this version the whole section is not included.

    If you are interested in seeing how they differ, you may have a look at
    the vimdiff file I created:

    https://www.dipl-ing-kessler.de/tmp/vpnc-script

    This afternoon I tested above solution on Raspbian OS and it worked
    instantly.

    It took me some time to find out, but it was worth every minute :-)

    Best regards,

    Markus





    On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 18:35:49 -0000 (UTC) Markus Robert Kessler wrote:

    Hi all,

    I am running several machines for connecting to our company intranet,
    using openconnect VPN.

    So far, it works. But:

    The debian based systems, i.e. Ubuntu 23.10 and Raspbian OS show up
    hundreds of routes after connect. And it's clear that they are brought
    to my client via server-initiated 'push route ...' command.

    Some of these routes are conflicting with machines in my home office
    net.

    So, I'd like to skip getting such a huge amount of useless routes. I
    want to set the routing by my own script, instead.

    The funny thing is that a Redhat-based OS, Mageia 9 (64 and 32 bit),
    does not behave like this, instead only the default route (10.0.0.0/8)
    is sent through tun0.

    So, maybe this is a matter of compilation?

    Or something else to look after, to prevent openconnect from doing this?

    Maybe someone can give a hint where to download the openconnect sources
    for Ubuntu?

    Thanks in advance!

    Best regards,

    Markus
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From William Unruh@unruh@invalid.ca to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Thu Apr 11 18:43:19 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 2024-04-09, Markus Robert Kessler <no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de> wrote:
    Hello all,

    here is what I've done in short:
    ...

    They are stored in ${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_ADDR}, and their total number,

    And ${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_MASK } and ${${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_MASKLEN}


    My problem is that what I get pushed is
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_ADDR=0.0.0.0
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_MASK=255.255.255.255
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_MASKLEN=32
    Ie, everything gets routed through tun, which is completely nuts.

    I presume that I could just have a file with the list of addresses I
    want sent through the tun, and include that in vpnc-script.
    The problem is how do I decide what to include if I want to use a number
    of different vpns.
    Is it reasonably robust to use
    CISCO_DEF_DOMAIN=ubc.ca
    to decide which routing address file to use

    Also, would a mask of 0.0.255.255 be MASKLENGTH of 32 or 16?

    What I am thinking of is putting a line
    source routes.${CISCO_DEF_DOMAIN}
    at the beginning of the vpnc-script file

    and have that file be full of the
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_{ADDR,MASK,MASKLEN) triplets with an appropriate
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC at the end.
    (with a test to make sure that the file exists before sourcing it)

    That would seem to be much easier than the massive rewrite you did.

    Would openconnect clean up the addresses that go through the tun when it
    is stopped?

    _


    i.e. the vector size is stored in $CISCO_SPLIT_EXC.

    To prevent openconnect from accepting all that trash, I could easily set this vector to empty, i.e. include

    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC=''

    as one the first commands in vpnc-script file, and, that's it!

    The reason why Suse's approach, which I took to build my own vpnc rpm
    from, and from which vpnc-script is taken from, does not accept all that routes, is that in this version the whole section is not included.

    If you are interested in seeing how they differ, you may have a look at
    the vimdiff file I created:

    https://www.dipl-ing-kessler.de/tmp/vpnc-script

    White letters on light green is almost unreadable.

    This afternoon I tested above solution on Raspbian OS and it worked instantly.

    It took me some time to find out, but it was worth every minute :-)

    Best regards,

    Markus

    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Markus Robert Kessler@no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Fri Apr 12 14:21:24 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 18:43:19 -0000 (UTC) William Unruh wrote:

    On 2024-04-09, Markus Robert Kessler <no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de>
    wrote:
    Hello all,

    here is what I've done in short:
    ...

    They are stored in ${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_ADDR}, and their total
    number,

    And ${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_MASK } and ${${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_MASKLEN}


    My problem is that what I get pushed is CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_ADDR=0.0.0.0 CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_MASK=255.255.255.255 CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_MASKLEN=32
    Ie, everything gets routed through tun, which is completely nuts.

    Routes named as 'EXC' should be EXcluded from being routed through tun.
    Don't know why the above behaves like that. Maybe there's another entry
    for that reading 'INC'

    I presume that I could just have a file with the list of addresses I
    want sent through the tun, and include that in vpnc-script.

    You could set the variables / source the relevant file, and
    either overwrite the pushed variables and set new max index,
    or append them to the inherited ones and adapt max index / vector size

    The problem is how do I decide what to include if I want to use a number
    of different vpns.

    You could copy and create different sections for every vpn.

    Or, use vpnc-script as a 'wrapper' file, which calls, for instance, vpnc-script.ubc.ca for CISCO_DEF_DOMAIN=ubc.ca
    and so on. Make sure that all env are available in the target scripts

    Is it reasonably robust to use CISCO_DEF_DOMAIN=ubc.ca to decide which routing address file to use

    Also, would a mask of 0.0.255.255 be MASKLENGTH of 32 or 16?

    32, but this mask hardly makes sense

    What I am thinking of is putting a line source
    routes.${CISCO_DEF_DOMAIN}
    at the beginning of the vpnc-script file

    and have that file be full of the
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_{ADDR,MASK,MASKLEN) triplets with an appropriate
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC at the end.
    (with a test to make sure that the file exists before sourcing it)

    That would seem to be much easier than the massive rewrite you did.

    No big rewrite from my side. To fit my needs it was enough to just add ONE line ( CISCO_SPLIT_EXC='' ) It just works for my company network

    Would openconnect clean up the addresses that go through the tun when it
    is stopped?

    Openconnect is calling vpnc-script for several reasons, see line

    #* reason -- why this script was called, one of: pre-init connect disconnect reconnect attempt-reconnect

    So, when openconnect is cleanly terminating (not kill -9 ...), it will
    finally invoke vpnc-script with cause 'disconnect' and the original route
    is being restored

    _


    i.e. the vector size is stored in $CISCO_SPLIT_EXC.

    To prevent openconnect from accepting all that trash, I could easily
    set this vector to empty, i.e. include

    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC=''

    as one the first commands in vpnc-script file, and, that's it!

    The reason why Suse's approach, which I took to build my own vpnc rpm
    from, and from which vpnc-script is taken from, does not accept all
    that routes, is that in this version the whole section is not included.

    If you are interested in seeing how they differ, you may have a look at
    the vimdiff file I created:

    https://www.dipl-ing-kessler.de/tmp/vpnc-script

    White letters on light green is almost unreadable.

    Yes, it's never easy to find a colorscheme in vimdiff which displays everything perfectly. But you can always select the relevant section to
    have blue on white text or vice versa

    This afternoon I tested above solution on Raspbian OS and it worked
    instantly.

    It took me some time to find out, but it was worth every minute :-)

    Best regards,

    Markus

    Best regards,

    Markus
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From William Unruh@unruh@invalid.ca to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Fri Apr 12 18:52:37 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 2024-04-12, Markus Robert Kessler <no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de> wrote:
    On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 18:43:19 -0000 (UTC) William Unruh wrote:

    On 2024-04-09, Markus Robert Kessler <no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de>
    wrote:
    Hello all,

    here is what I've done in short:
    ...

    They are stored in ${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_ADDR}, and their total
    number,

    And ${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_MASK } and ${${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_MASKLEN}


    My problem is that what I get pushed is CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_ADDR=0.0.0.0
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_MASK=255.255.255.255 CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_MASKLEN=32
    Ie, everything gets routed through tun, which is completely nuts.

    Routes named as 'EXC' should be EXcluded from being routed through tun.
    Don't know why the above behaves like that. Maybe there's another entry
    for that reading 'INC'

    Yes, there is a similar set of entries with INC which I should have been
    using. It is exactly same as EXC but with INC instead.

    I presume that I could just have a file with the list of addresses I
    want sent through the tun, and include that in vpnc-script.

    You could set the variables / source the relevant file, and
    either overwrite the pushed variables and set new max index,
    or append them to the inherited ones and adapt max index / vector size

    The problem is how do I decide what to include if I want to use a number
    of different vpns.

    You could copy and create different sections for every vpn.

    Or, use vpnc-script as a 'wrapper' file, which calls, for instance, vpnc-script.ubc.ca for CISCO_DEF_DOMAIN=ubc.ca
    and so on. Make sure that all env are available in the target scripts

    Is it reasonably robust to use CISCO_DEF_DOMAIN=ubc.ca to decide which
    routing address file to use

    Also, would a mask of 0.0.255.255 be MASKLENGTH of 32 or 16?

    32, but this mask hardly makes sense
    Agreed. I meant
    255.255.0.0 Is that 16 or 32 ?

    Anyway, it seems to be working.



    What I am thinking of is putting a line source
    routes.${CISCO_DEF_DOMAIN}
    at the beginning of the vpnc-script file

    and have that file be full of the
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_{ADDR,MASK,MASKLEN) triplets with an appropriate CISCO_SPLIT_INC_${i}_{ADDR,MASK,MASKLEN) triplets with an appropriate
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC at the end.
    CISCO_INC_EXC at the end.
    (with a test to make sure that the file exists before sourcing it)

    That would seem to be much easier than the massive rewrite you did.

    No big rewrite from my side. To fit my needs it was enough to just add ONE line ( CISCO_SPLIT_EXC='' ) It just works for my company network

    Would openconnect clean up the addresses that go through the tun when it
    is stopped?

    Yes, and it does work. All the tun routes disappear when I close
    openconnect.
    Is there some openconnect command that tells the running version to
    quit?


    Openconnect is calling vpnc-script for several reasons, see line

    #* reason -- why this script was called, one of: pre-init connect disconnect reconnect attempt-reconnect

    So, when openconnect is cleanly terminating (not kill -9 ...), it will finally invoke vpnc-script with cause 'disconnect' and the original route
    is being restored

    _


    i.e. the vector size is stored in $CISCO_SPLIT_EXC.

    To prevent openconnect from accepting all that trash, I could easily
    set this vector to empty, i.e. include

    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC=''

    as one the first commands in vpnc-script file, and, that's it!

    The reason why Suse's approach, which I took to build my own vpnc rpm
    from, and from which vpnc-script is taken from, does not accept all
    that routes, is that in this version the whole section is not included.

    If you are interested in seeing how they differ, you may have a look at
    the vimdiff file I created:

    https://www.dipl-ing-kessler.de/tmp/vpnc-script

    White letters on light green is almost unreadable.

    Yes, it's never easy to find a colorscheme in vimdiff which displays everything perfectly. But you can always select the relevant section to
    have blue on white text or vice versa

    This afternoon I tested above solution on Raspbian OS and it worked
    instantly.

    It took me some time to find out, but it was worth every minute :-)

    Best regards,

    Markus

    Best regards,

    Markus
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From David W. Hodgins@dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Fri Apr 12 16:12:39 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:52:37 -0400, William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote: <snip>
    Agreed. I meant
    255.255.0.0 Is that 16 or 32 ?

    255.255.255.0 is a /24 meaning only the last 8 bits (octet) of the address changes.
    The first 24 bits of the 32 bit address are fixed.

    255.255.0.0 is a /16
    255.0.0.0 is a /8

    A /32 would be written as a netmask of 255.255.255.255, in which case only one ip address is in the selected range.

    That's for an ipv4 network. For ipv6 there are 128 bits instead of 32.

    Regards, Dave Hodgins
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Markus Robert Kessler@no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Sat Apr 13 07:36:30 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 18:52:37 -0000 (UTC) William Unruh wrote:

    On 2024-04-12, Markus Robert Kessler <no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de>
    wrote:
    On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 18:43:19 -0000 (UTC) William Unruh wrote:

    On 2024-04-09, Markus Robert Kessler <no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de>
    wrote:
    Hello all,

    here is what I've done in short:
    ...

    They are stored in ${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_ADDR}, and their total
    number,

    And ${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_MASK } and
    ${${CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_MASKLEN}


    My problem is that what I get pushed is CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_ADDR=0.0.0.0
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_MASK=255.255.255.255 CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_0_MASKLEN=32
    Ie, everything gets routed through tun, which is completely nuts.

    Routes named as 'EXC' should be EXcluded from being routed through tun.
    Don't know why the above behaves like that. Maybe there's another entry
    for that reading 'INC'

    Yes, there is a similar set of entries with INC which I should have been using. It is exactly same as EXC but with INC instead.

    I presume that I could just have a file with the list of addresses I
    want sent through the tun, and include that in vpnc-script.

    You could set the variables / source the relevant file, and either
    overwrite the pushed variables and set new max index,
    or append them to the inherited ones and adapt max index / vector size

    The problem is how do I decide what to include if I want to use a
    number of different vpns.

    You could copy and create different sections for every vpn.

    Or, use vpnc-script as a 'wrapper' file, which calls, for instance,
    vpnc-script.ubc.ca for CISCO_DEF_DOMAIN=ubc.ca and so on. Make sure
    that all env are available in the target scripts

    Is it reasonably robust to use CISCO_DEF_DOMAIN=ubc.ca to decide which
    routing address file to use

    Also, would a mask of 0.0.255.255 be MASKLENGTH of 32 or 16?

    32, but this mask hardly makes sense
    Agreed. I meant 255.255.0.0 Is that 16 or 32 ?

    As Dave already mentioned, this should be 16

    Anyway, it seems to be working.



    What I am thinking of is putting a line source
    routes.${CISCO_DEF_DOMAIN}
    at the beginning of the vpnc-script file

    and have that file be full of the
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC_${i}_{ADDR,MASK,MASKLEN) triplets with an appropriate
    CISCO_SPLIT_INC_${i}_{ADDR,MASK,MASKLEN) triplets with an appropriate
    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC at the end.
    CISCO_INC_EXC at the end.
    (with a test to make sure that the file exists before sourcing it)

    That would seem to be much easier than the massive rewrite you did.

    No big rewrite from my side. To fit my needs it was enough to just add
    ONE line ( CISCO_SPLIT_EXC='' ) It just works for my company network

    Would openconnect clean up the addresses that go through the tun when
    it is stopped?

    Yes, and it does work. All the tun routes disappear when I close
    openconnect.
    Is there some openconnect command that tells the running version to
    quit?

    No, not from openconnect's side.

    Instead, when openconnect runs in foreground mode ( i.e. not being started with -b ), it can be terminated cleanly with CTRL-C.

    Alternatively, vpnc-disconnect ( out of vpnc package ) can be used, as
    long as openconnect writes the same pid file, which vpnc-disconnect takes
    the pid number from to ( also cleanly ) terminate the process.

    In my case, I start it like so:

    sudo openconnect --pid-file /var/run/vpnc.pid -b ...
    ( on debian based systems the path and filename may differ ),
    hence, I can easily end it with vpnc-disconnect.


    Openconnect is calling vpnc-script for several reasons, see line

    #* reason -- why this script was called, one of:
    pre-init connect disconnect reconnect attempt-reconnect

    So, when openconnect is cleanly terminating (not kill -9 ...), it will
    finally invoke vpnc-script with cause 'disconnect' and the original
    route is being restored

    _


    i.e. the vector size is stored in $CISCO_SPLIT_EXC.

    To prevent openconnect from accepting all that trash, I could easily
    set this vector to empty, i.e. include

    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC=''

    as one the first commands in vpnc-script file, and, that's it!

    The reason why Suse's approach, which I took to build my own vpnc rpm
    from, and from which vpnc-script is taken from, does not accept all
    that routes, is that in this version the whole section is not
    included.

    If you are interested in seeing how they differ, you may have a look
    at the vimdiff file I created:

    https://www.dipl-ing-kessler.de/tmp/vpnc-script

    White letters on light green is almost unreadable.

    Yes, it's never easy to find a colorscheme in vimdiff which displays
    everything perfectly. But you can always select the relevant section to
    have blue on white text or vice versa

    This afternoon I tested above solution on Raspbian OS and it worked
    instantly.

    It took me some time to find out, but it was worth every minute :-)

    Best regards,

    Markus
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From William Unruh@unruh@invalid.ca to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Sat Apr 13 20:58:33 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    On 2024-04-13, Markus Robert Kessler <no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de> wrote:
    On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 18:52:37 -0000 (UTC) William Unruh wrote:

    On 2024-04-12, Markus Robert Kessler <no_reply@dipl-ing-kessler.de>
    wrote:
    On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 18:43:19 -0000 (UTC) William Unruh wrote:


    No, not from openconnect's side.

    Instead, when openconnect runs in foreground mode ( i.e. not being started with -b ), it can be terminated cleanly with CTRL-C.

    So I presume that openconnect sends a disconnect to vpnc-script to tear
    down the routes through tun.


    Alternatively, vpnc-disconnect ( out of vpnc package ) can be used, as
    long as openconnect writes the same pid file, which vpnc-disconnect takes the pid number from to ( also cleanly ) terminate the process.


    OK, that's a good suggestion.

    I have now implimented my idea on two different vpns -- one at UBC and
    ont at tamu, and it seems to work on both. Of course if a web page in
    either links to something outside their address space that I specified
    in the altered lines in the vpnc-script, then that goes through the
    original connection. If I wanted to view US netflix programs from
    Canada, that would not work, since netflix would see the packets as
    coming from Canada, rather then the US. So, some way of adding to the
    list of the IP addresses that the connections tunnels dynamically would
    be good. But I guess I can always use ip commend to add routes to my
    systems routing table through tun.

    The alternative, that everything gets routed through tun really is not
    very good (never mind that all connections I have to any outside
    computers get broken when I start the openconnect connection.

    Anyway, thanks for pointing me to the way to get this working.
    In my case, I start it like so:

    sudo openconnect --pid-file /var/run/vpnc.pid -b ...
    ( on debian based systems the path and filename may differ ),
    hence, I can easily end it with vpnc-disconnect.


    Openconnect is calling vpnc-script for several reasons, see line

    #* reason -- why this script was called, one of:
    pre-init connect disconnect reconnect attempt-reconnect

    So, when openconnect is cleanly terminating (not kill -9 ...), it will
    finally invoke vpnc-script with cause 'disconnect' and the original
    route is being restored

    _


    i.e. the vector size is stored in $CISCO_SPLIT_EXC.

    To prevent openconnect from accepting all that trash, I could easily >>>>> set this vector to empty, i.e. include

    CISCO_SPLIT_EXC=''

    as one the first commands in vpnc-script file, and, that's it!

    The reason why Suse's approach, which I took to build my own vpnc rpm >>>>> from, and from which vpnc-script is taken from, does not accept all
    that routes, is that in this version the whole section is not
    included.

    If you are interested in seeing how they differ, you may have a look >>>>> at the vimdiff file I created:

    https://www.dipl-ing-kessler.de/tmp/vpnc-script

    White letters on light green is almost unreadable.

    Yes, it's never easy to find a colorscheme in vimdiff which displays
    everything perfectly. But you can always select the relevant section to
    have blue on white text or vice versa

    This afternoon I tested above solution on Raspbian OS and it worked
    instantly.

    It took me some time to find out, but it was worth every minute :-)

    Best regards,

    Markus
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From scott@scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 17 22:25:34 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    In article <uui04k$3f9re$1@dont-email.me>,
    William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
    On 2024-04-02, Scott Alfter <scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote:
    In article <uuf01e$2lb63$1@dont-email.me>,
    Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
    On 01.04.2024 um 18:35 Uhr Markus Robert Kessler wrote:
    So, I'd like to skip getting such a huge amount of useless routes. I
    want to set the routing by my own script, instead.

    NetworkManager has an option to ignore routes from the peer.
    Connection settings --> IPv4/IPv6 settings --> Routes --> Ignore >>>automatically obtained routes

    The Cisco ASA at work pushes some routes to my computer when I connect to
    it. One of them (for a remote office) uses the same 192.168.1.0/24 subnet >> as my home network, so I lose access to my file server, printers, etc. at
    home when I'm connected to the VPN. I'd been considering moving my home
    network to a different subnet, but this would be easier...will have to look >> into it.

    ?? 192.168.x.x is non-routable.

    I probably should've explained the situation. At work, the main office uses 172.16.0.0/22. A satellite office a few blocks away uses 192.168.1.0/24; a static route is added to the handful of desktops that need to talk to hosts over there. At home, my personal network also uses 192.168.1.0/24.
    Connecting to the VPN from home causes my home server, printers, etc. to
    become inaccessible as a result, as traffic for 192.168.1.0/24 gets routed
    to the satellite office.

    The ability to ignore some of the routes provided by the VPN would be nice,
    as I don't need to deal with stuff at the satellite office 99% of the time.
    --
    _/_
    / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
    (IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
    \_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From scott@scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) to alt.os.linux.ubuntu,comp.sys.raspberry-pi,alt.os.linux.mageia on Wed Apr 17 22:29:29 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    In article <uujalb$3rv5p$2@dont-email.me>,
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    On 02/04/2024 23:16, William Unruh wrote:
    ?? 192.168.x.x is non-routable. Ie, unless you are directly connected to
    the network you cannot access it. Is your home on the same physical net
    as that remote office? Otherwise I do not see how tht could do anything
    to your attachment to the home network.

    192.168.x.x is routable.

    It just isn't something that the Internet routes, by convention.
    It can be routed via a VPN.

    It is a good argument for changing his home IP network to something else.

    That's also something I've considered. My home router's a Raspberry Pi CM4
    on a carrier board that adds a second Ethernet jack, running OpenWRT. I've thought about downloading the config, changing all occurrences of 192.168.1.
    to 192.168.100. (or whatever), and uploading the changed config, but have
    been a bit nervous about it (especially since the WAF of a downed network is pretty low :-) ).
    --
    _/_
    / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
    (IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
    \_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Anssi Saari@anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi to comp.sys.raspberry-pi on Fri Apr 19 11:08:46 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.raspberry-pi

    scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) writes:

    That's also something I've considered. My home router's a Raspberry Pi CM4 on a carrier board that adds a second Ethernet jack, running OpenWRT.

    Just curious but which carrier board? Is there a case too?
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114