From: David N. <pp...@da...> - 2015-09-25 14:40:55
|
On 25/09/15 17:28, James Cameron wrote: > Have you thought of doing this in Network Manager? Then I guess it > could be available to other tunnel protocols. Is there a reason why > it has to be done in pptp? I didn't think of that. PPTP would still need to be modified because it installs a single route to the remote server replacing any existing route. That code could be removed and performed by the invoking process, which might be Network Manager, or could be a simple wrapper. I don't want to propose removing existing PPTP function (updates to routing table), merely an incremental change. I agree that other protocols could benefit from this, but Network Manager looks rather harder to change, particularly as I'd also have to change those other protocols (e.g. changes required to pptp.) It seems productive to demonstrate utility by changing PPTP, and leaving a generalised solution until we have actual (rather than theoretical) need. |