public inbox for development@lists.ipfire.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>
To: development@lists.ipfire.org
Subject: Strongswan 5 issues in IPFire 2.13
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 13:21:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1362658890.16414.31.camel@rice-oxley.tremer.info> (raw)

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2093 bytes --]

Hey,

when IPFire 2.13 was released, the latest version of strongswan was
shipped with it. Apparently, some people have problems operating their
VPN connections with it.

This is a brief summary from my point of view:

The first version with these changes that might cause trouble has been
released in August 2012 with a big headline which said: Testers needed.

 * http://planet.ipfire.org/post/testers-needed-strongswan-5-0-0
 * http://lists.ipfire.org/pipermail/development/2012-August/000039.html

My mail on the mailing list states:
> It should not require any manual interaction at all. Please install
> and give me feedback about the connection stability and the
> interoperability with other (proprietary) implementations.

It's as if someone had known...

If you think, we didn't have people who actually tested this, you are
wrong. There were a lot of people and the reports I got of them were all
like: "Yeah, this made my VPN tunnels more stable".
Especially when the configuration of one connection has been edited, the
other connections remained established all the time. A big advantage
over the implementation in IPFire 2.11!

Eight days before the final version of IPFire 2.13 was released, people
started complaining. It was not a real bug report, but just a shout out
"something went wrong, I could not be bothered, so I downgraded!". No
technical details, no logs, no what-so-ever.

Since the release, a bunch of more people complained about similar
problems. Again, no one provided (or was willing to provide) information
that helps to solve the problem. Nobody was even bothered to create a
proper bug report in bugzilla.

My VPN connections run for more than six months with strongswan 5 and I
never had any problems since then.

If someone really has interest in solving this, maybe it is time that
you start the action and help the developers. This is not a project
where you can tell people what they should do (for you). This is an Open
Source project - so everyone is able to read the source code, check what
changes have been made and to provide a fix.

-Michael


             reply	other threads:[~2013-03-07 12:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-07 12:21 Michael Tremer [this message]
2013-03-07 13:20 ` Aw: " Bernhard Bitsch
2013-07-04 10:40 Michael Tremer
2013-07-07 19:57 ` Stefan Schantl

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1362658890.16414.31.camel@rice-oxley.tremer.info \
    --to=michael.tremer@ipfire.org \
    --cc=development@lists.ipfire.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox