similar to: Forwarding in switch mode

Hi, Etienne I took a look for the below host configuration parameter (IndirectData), the default is no. For the below example: A ConnectTo B, B ConnectTo C: If IndirectData = no (default), then A wouldn’t establish direct connection with C, but will be forwarded by B. If IndirectData = yes, then A will try to establish direct connection with C, even though A don’t have the statement of

Hi, Etienne In addition, is there any option or switch can turn of the automatic direct connection? For the example below, even A has the route to C and can establish UDP connection directly, but I need the traffic to go through B, how can I achieve that easily? (instead of remove something from A’s routing table, or manually block the connection between A and C) > On 1 May 2017, at 6:28 PM,

*You should repeat this for all nodes you ConnectTo, or which ConnectTo you. However, remember that you do not need to ConnectTo all nodes in the VPN; it is only necessary to create one or a few meta-connections, after the connections are made tinc will learn about all the other nodes in the VPN, and will automatically make other connections as necessary. * The above is from the docs. Assuming

Hi, I´m using Tinc for several years, but I didn´t fix a performance problem. There a about 20 nodes in this network. Master: 10.0.0.12 (dedicated host in a datacenter, debian, 100mBit port) tinc.conf: Name = TincKnoten12 AddressFamily = ipv4 Interface = tun ProcessPriority=high mode = router #DirectOnly = no Compression=0 PMTUDiscovery = yes #IndirectData = yes #ReplayWindow = 64 #ConnectTo

On Mon, 4 May 2020 18:45:19 +0200 (CEST) Sven-Haegar Koch <haegar at sdinet.de> wrote: > On Mon, 4 May 2020, Pallinger Péter wrote: > > > ------- TL;DR ------- > > > > Performance seems slow (around 300-400Mbit peak). > > How to improve? > > Not sure if that could be the case for you, my links are not that > fast: > > Make sure to disable

Hi, We have a tinc network of about ~200 hosts and in the full mesh configuration we've had a lot of problems with the edge propagation storms taking the entire network down. Recently we had a setup with a small number of "hubs" to which all the other nodes connected to, which limited the number of meta connections, but that didn't help much with the edge propagation issues.

Hi! here a little patch for darknet functionality, i hope it does what its intended for sufficiently ... but it seems to work :). what should it do? imagine your friend-network. A trusts B and C. B trusts D and E, D trust F, C trusts G. All trust relationships are mutal A <---> C <---> G ^ \ \-----> B <---> D <---> F ^ \ \---> E

Hello, Recently, the following problem started happening with a particular samba server: If i have a file open for reading (say, a pdf in xpdf) and then try to write to it (say, through recompiling a latex document) it complains that it cannot open the file for writing. this seems like a file lock issue but I am unsure where it is happening. My previous usage should be perfectly safe since

Hello, I am tying to create tinc vpn for the ~1000 nodes and was thinking why meta connections are needed at all if I only need static configuration where every node knows addresses of other hosts and due to the amount of traffic any indirect connections will not work, so DirectOnly=yes is a must and then passing around routing information is not needed, right? Currently I have 10 nodes

Hi, we use a tinc network of about 400 nodes, all of them linux servers, partly in different datacenters (but generally low latency). Usually this is working very well (for weeks without a problem). >From time to time the whole network goes down though. This happened when we restarted a larger number of servers or when there was a connectivity issue between datacenters or some (short)

Hi, thank you, Andrea, for the forward. On 07/13/17 10:19, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > From: Thomas Meyer <thomas@m3y3r.de> > To: libvirt-users@redhat.com > Subject: [libvirt-users] UEFI NVRAM variables > Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 07:49:43 +0200 > >> Hi, >> >> how do I set the BootOrder variable in an NVRAM file for UEFI

Hi, I'm using Tinc v1.0.11 on Ubuntu 10.04 and seeing high CPU usage (up to 30%) on what I wouldn't consider high traffic levels. The traffic is application server to database server connections and multicast communication for session-replication on the application server. I'm running the tinc daemons in switch mode, to support the multicast. I have tried settings: TunnelServer =

Hi, I've set up Tinc in switch-mode on the three nodes "gw", "rb493g" and "v900w", but the nodes "rb493g" and "w900v" do not connect to each other. On each node port 655 is opened with TCP and UDP. "gw": static IPv4- and IPv6 address listed in the hosts-file "gw" hosts-files: "gw",

We run tinc in a linux environment in which it sits there waiting for connections from the clients. All clients are configured to only have one ConnectTo which points to this server. We're seeing in the server log that as soon as a client's connection is activated, a whole bunch of "Flushing x bytes to that host would block" is logged and the whole vpn is bogged down and has

The server has a 1G symmetrical fibre line. It has been speedtested to various local servers to be close to 800-900M. When there is only a single client, there isn't much problem and as soon as the connection is made, the ping time through to tunnel is a respectable 30ms. As soon as a few more clients are connected, ping time degrades to hundreds and sometimes seconds and with dropped packets.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 03:36:08PM +0200, Hans de Groot wrote: > hosta  <--> hostb  <-->  hostc > > Hosta and hostc are not directly connected via tinc. But both are conncted > via hostb (I called my network tincnet). This works fine I can ssh from > hosta to hostc and vice versa without any problems. > > hostc is in a whitelisted iprange at some service

On 30.08.2016 17:37, Guus Sliepen wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 02:38:16PM +0200, Armin Schindler wrote: > >> we use a meshed VPN with TINC to connect 7 offices. >> Some office are in other countries and use other ISPs. The connection >> between some ISPs (peering partners) are not that good. This means we >> have packet loss between those direct connections.

Hi list, I'm hoping someone can help me understand when to use IndirectData. Quoting the manual: IndirectData = <yes|no> (no) This option specifies whether other tinc daemons besides the one you specified with ConnectTo can make a direct connection to you. This is especially useful if you are behind a firewall and it is impossible to make a connection from the outside to your tinc

Dear All Can you let me know is this possible to if we are using Asterisk version 1.4 or 1.6 for incoming voicemail we can send as email in text formta. Means voice mesage converted into text message & send it to resp. email ids. is this possible. If yes. we can do the same with help of Asterisk or we require expertnal application need to isntall/integrate to work for speech to test. Please

Hi, All Here is the case: A, B, C, D all configured with "IndirectData = yes”, so connection only happens when there’s a “ConnectTo” in tinc.conf. Arrow indicate the “ConnectTo” direction Everything works fine earlier as below: 1. A connect to C, D connect to C 2. C is the transit node where only forward traffic between A and C 3. D advertise 0.0.0.0/0#2 4. A can access internet from D