On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 16:52 +0100, Burton, Ross wrote: > On 3 July 2014 11:42, David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> wrote: > > Hm, odd. Did you ever come up with a coherent solution to this? > > Arguably, it's OK to do something which "breaks split DNS" in the case > > when you weren't using split DNS, so we could make that line > > conditional. But isn't DNS still going to be broken in the 'split' case, > > and never give you answers for hosts on the VPN? > > My coherent solution is currently to use my other Linux or Windows > machines, depending on what bit of the VPN I need to access, and will > be installing the commercial VPN tools along with numerous other > "approved" applications soon... > > I considered filing a bug but as I wasn't actually using vpnc, I can > see it being ignored. There's an openconnect port too, and the use cases are identical so I'm fairly sure it'll bite vpnc users too. -- dwmw2 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 5745 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openconnect-devel/attachments/20140704/6c3c3819/attachment.bin>
