similar to: Metadata flooding

Thank you for the helpful advice. We will try to group the servers with different ConnectTo servers first. If this does not help we will look at the TunnelServer solution. Just to make sure we understand TunnelServer correctly: do you need to specify every host as ConnectTo that the host should be able to communicate with or is it sufficient to just provide the hosts files? Thanks, Hendrik

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 01:04:31PM +0200, Hendrik Schumacher wrote: > 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) maintenance on the network > infrastructure. The problem was already described in the mailing list (for > example here:

I don't know why, but for my case, I reduced the tinc topology from a complex one(which provide layered redundancy) to a very simpled one(one connection), and that connection drop disappeared. Later, let me draw the topology and share the config to you to see if there's any findings of the cause. Guus Sliepen <guus at tinc-vpn.org>于2017年9月14日 周四上午3:20写道： > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017

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

*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, 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.

We have a handful of nodes set up. Some are NAT'd but a few have direct access to the Internet. Sample confs: HostA: Name = HostA AddressFamily = any Interface = tap0 Mode = switch Connectto = HostB GraphDumpFile = /tmp/mesh HostB: Name = HostB AddressFamily = any Interface = tap0 Mode = switch Connectto = HostA GraphDumpFile = /tmp/mesh And so on. If I use HostA as the main meta sever.

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, 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

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,

Well i currently try to set up tinc between two hosts, one with normal dsl connection one behind some kind of unknown firewall (Note since OpenVp is able to connect when the normal one is the Server I guess tinc should be able, too) start.bat-------------------------------tincd -n Empire-Network -D -d4 --bypass-security (Bypass is only currently because tis not working yet)

Hi all! I still have never managed to fully wrap my head around how UDP data tunnels can be established between nodes. Everytime I think I understand it, I see something that confuses me again Just now I am seeing the following: I have nodes A, B + C A has everybody's keys and host configuration files. B and C only have A's key, and host config with A's public IP address. B and

Hi, we are using Tinc in our Freifunk Network in Oldenburg for internode connections over the internet. So Tinc is running on OpenWrt 10.03 on Dlink Dir-300 Routers. We all have enough internet bandwith (1,6 MB/sec and more) but we only get a maximum speed of ~350KB/sec between two tinc nodes because then tinc uses 99% of the cpu. Is it possible to get more Speed with tinc on this machines?

Hi Guus Following your suggestion we reconfigured our tinc network as follows. Here is a new graph and below is our updated configuration: http://imgur.com/a/n6ksh - 2 Tinc nodes (yellow labels) have a public external IP and port 655 open. They both have ConnectTo's to each other and AutoConnect = yes - The remainder tinc nodes (blue labels) have their tinc.conf set up as follows:

Hello list, I use tinc with QOS, and since some weeks I got problem with tunnel disconnection because the default "Pingtimeout" of 5 sec is reach. I think it happens because of the QOS shappe the tinc traffic (data here) to let some BP for VOIP, but whate is very strange is that the ICMP protocol is not include in the shapping, so tinc would never 'see' latency on the link,

Thank you Guillermo. I will give it a go and revert back with my results. Regards Yazeed Fataar <yazeedfataar at hotmail.com> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Guillermo Bisheimer < gbisheimer at bys-control.com.ar> wrote: > Hi Yazeed, > > You have to add this to tinc.conf > > TunnelServer = yes > > Otherwise tinc will manage package routing internally. Then you

Thanks Guss, some comments and questions: If you make the yellow nodes ConnectTo all other nodes, and not have > AutoConnect = yes, and the other nodes just have AutoConnect = yes but > no ConnectTo's, then you will get the desired graph. The reason this approach is not desirable is because it fails at automation. It requires us to add a new line of AutoConnect = <new node that

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

Dear All, We are trying the Tinc invites to let nodes join the network. This is working as described but we want to push some configuration for some nodes but this seemed not to be working. What is working is the following invite: Name = test_invite NetName = test_VPN ConnectTo = test_hub01 Ifconfig = 172.16.1.4/24 Subnet = 172.16.1.4

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 =