1. 1. When the user's data source uses NTP cluster, whether switching to the new service may lead to the compatibility problem of NTP cluster network

Yes, absolutely, and if you visit the link in the post you'll see a comparison of them, and at the bottom is some explanation.

Can chronyd completely replace NTP?

Вячеслав @Viacheslav, я не понял вопроса...
В шапке таска лежит рабочий патч

PR https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/581

Tested creation on both server and client.
OpenVPN conf file is contains the key-direction
Server and client can connect correctly.

I have ntp listening in vrf mgmt, note that i have not set vrf bind-to-all.

@Viacheslav if we set acct-port=0 it should to disable accounting.

[radius]
server=x.x.x.x,secret,auth-port=1812,acct-port=0

@Dmitry Your suggestions? Is it possible?
What parameter do we need to change?

We need to check what's going on here https://github.com/vyos/vyatta-cfg/blob/current/etc/bash_completion.d/vyatta-cfg#L930-L962

@jack9603301 I tried building jool into the VyOS image but because their deb packages uses DKMS which is not compatible with VyOS so somebody has to create a VyOS specific deb package.

Also, while setting up test for T2906:

No problem

I can see why the smoketests pass. They only check if the interface has been removed from the config - not the system.

Possible bug with "admin_state"

@c-po What do you propose?

It has passed the GNS test, and the test cases are as follows:

@banditos13 can you send a link to the file, which you suggest to fix, or create PR?

Do we need it for "crux"?
This does not affect the work of VPN service.

@Magnum Can you test it?

@Cheeze_It thank you for testing.

Here is the test for the LDP session time change.

Here is the test for Explicit Null.

Everything seems to be good. Closing case.

Simple R1&R2
R2 will have low priority in HA and other ip-adresses in the same subnet

Thanks @Viacheslav; I'm running other tests with vyos-load-config at the moment, and will check and add.

Can you provide a simple config of R1 R3 and R4?
I want to reproduce it in the test lab.

I cannot check rolling release, but on latest 1.2.6 problem is solved.

What content of "conf-path" ?

Which files in /config/tinc0/hosts ?

Hello everyone, I am integrating tinc. At present, I have passed the basic test in a simple virtual machine. The command line is simplified. Examples are as follows:

Thank you.
Reopen the task or create a new one if you find some problems.

I have investigated it now a bit deeper and found out that this router got migrated to VRF automatically (Our deployment stack automatically migrates upgraded/new deployed routers to VRF usage for OOB/VxLAN communication).

PR https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/579

I think it some code like

Submitted second PR

Many thanks!

I can see a case where people deliberately do NOT want to use ISP provided DNS servers (to avoid DNS NX hijacking) (and/or lock to a major internet DNS server like google 8.8.8.8 or Quad9 9.9.9.9 or Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 for example)

This is an example scenario in which this comes handy:
You have three ethernet interfaces
Two are connected to different LANs
The third is connected to WAN (another router)
All networks offer DHCP and def gw
The LANs offer it for internet access
The WAN offers it for branch access
We want to keep def gw received for WAN and ignore internet access offered by those LANs

@Merijn Can you check the latest rolling?
Or write please which commands do you use?

@lbv2rus Can you try the latest rolling release?

Unfortunately I can not reproduce this issue on my test system and also our smoketests (https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/blob/current/smoketest/scripts/cli/test_interfaces_openvpn.py) do not trigger the bug when run locally on the VyOS device by calling:

@Gunni can you check the latest rolling?

@Dmitry

set interfaces ethernet eth1 address 2001:db8::2/64
set interfaces l2tpv3 l2tpeth1010 address '192.168.37.2/27'
set interfaces l2tpv3 l2tpeth1010 encapsulation 'ip'
set interfaces l2tpv3 l2tpeth1010 local-ip '2001:db8::2'
set interfaces l2tpv3 l2tpeth1010 peer-session-id '100'
set interfaces l2tpv3 l2tpeth1010 peer-tunnel-id '200'
set interfaces l2tpv3 l2tpeth1010 remote-ip '2001:db8::1'
set interfaces l2tpv3 l2tpeth1010 session-id '100'
set interfaces l2tpv3 l2tpeth1010 tunnel-id '200'

Do other vendors suppert highjacking/altering of DHCP options? I feel this kills the whole concept of DHCP.

@jjcordon can you test the latest rolling?

Just tested with:
https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/commit/85cc735b05be109e6daa5403efa4122b8b6e79d2

@D0peX Can you check the latest rolling?

Works as expected.

No, I'm running this commit:
https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/commit/029f9839c21317ec5959b331eee25da472d08dc1

There have been some deletion errors yesterday - are you running the latest rolling release? They should have been fixed in there. If noe please provide me some CLI samples to reproduce the issue.

Check out the October versions on both sides.

I spoke to soon.
The interfaces are very persistant now - when you delete the vtun interface it doesn't get taken down!

Tested in my lab and it works both during creation and reboot.

Submitted PR