Hi,
I rely in this two options of OpenVPN for old setups, and changing all the remote hosts to not use lzo and udp is a real pain. Can you implemnt this two features in the openvpn server/client?
Regards
This has been requested here to death… Mikrotik has never shown any indication that this is ever going to happen.
Still, people need it. +1 for the request
+1.
+1 also here
+1
But, at this point I think we are really beating a dead horse.
–Eric
+1 
+1 too 
The post below has how to utilize OpenVPN on the Meta Router to provide UDP and LZO compression, and all other openVPN Linux features.
so… If Metarouter can run some virtual router with OSPF we should ditch the OSPF feature in Mikrotik as well?
Metarouter is not the solution.
+1 for LZO and UDP in ROS.
+1 for me too.
I don’t care too much about LZO. But I need UDP tunnels (TCP is unusable for many situations as a tunneling protocol as outlined by others previously).
Again, MetaROUTER is not the solution here, especially by causing a major CPU load just to run on my RB…
comp-lzo support
auth-user-pass not required
tls-auth key support
udp support
Why is this still not available?
When you see the compression???
You can argue a lot but the compression is not just the need for asymmetric channels, can save money and have a lot of good!
So why still not implemented …?
Are not you ashamed that dosihpor not added and ignore pozhalaniya users???
Когда появится сжатие??? 
Можно много спорить но функция сжатия просто не обходима на асимметрических каналах, способна экономить деньги и еще много хорошего!
Так почему до сих пор не реализована…?
I also request UDP.
OpenVPN is common feature of Linux and probably the best way to estabilish VPN but MikroTik killed it.
I don’t want to use PPTP and IPSec has troubles with firewalls.
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:01 pm
no plans for thatPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 8:52 am
The answer was clear - > We will not make new OpenVPN features> .Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:14 pm
ssh is our own implementationtunnels Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:32 am
Thank for bringing up a thread more than a year old.
The answer was clear - > We will not make new OpenVPN features> .
Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 3:08 pm
eghtedari2000, OPENWRT is a different operating system, > please ask in their forum about how to configure it: >
https://forum.openwrt.org/Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 12:12 pm
No, it’s certainly not the reason. > I have previously already explained that there were many unfixed problems in the OpenVPN itself> , so we > have stopped development> , and > concentrated on more reliable projects like SSTP> . > We don’t plan to make UDP support in OpenVPN in near future> .Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 12:47 pm
We will not drop it, we will fix what we can, and leave it as is. What I’m saying is, that > we will probably not make UDP support> .
Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 7:33 am
Another problem with it, client and server end must match configuration 100%. if you have different clients connecting, this will be a huge pain to get done. OpenVPN is hard to configure. > Maybe not for you, but in comparison to our other options> .Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 7:24 am
OpenVPN is very very buggy and hard to implement> . Our developers almost all committed suicide trying to make it work. It’s a big mess, so we can’t continue to implement it 100%Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:42 am
Practically (i am on a SSTP tunnel all the time now, for testing), I couldn’t say there is a performance difference with or without the tunnel. Local network file transfers are just as fasttunnels Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:58 am
We also have SSTP now, which works great and has the same benefits as OpenVPN. It’s currently not popular yet, and (except RouterOS) it’s supported only in Windows, but technically it’s very interesting
Source: https://www.bestvpn.com/blog/4147/pptp-vs-l2tp-vs-openvpn-vs-sstp/
-
OpenVPN is easily best all round VPN solution despite needing third party software on all platforms. It is reliable, fast, and (most importantly) secure (even against the NSA), although it usually needs a bit more setting up than the other protocols
-
SSTP offers most of the advantages of OpenVPN but only in a Windows environment. This does mean that it is better integrated into the OS, but it is poorly supported by VPN providers thanks to this limitation. In addition to this, its proprietary nature and the fact that is was created by Microsoft mean that we for one don’t trust it
That says it all.
http://wikipedia.org/wiki/TUN/TAP
We used exactly the TAP and how it can be replaced?
L2 is used to implement the channels for QinQ, …
Not one of all the other options did not give proper result in performance or have any great delay and packet loss. (Considering options SSTP + EoIP, PPTP + Eoip - little protection, a lot of problems, a large load on the processor!)
Definitely need to continue support and development of OpenVPN!!!
+1+1+1+1+1+1+1
Very important