ddns patches for desec.io provider support

  Hi,


sorry for the delay. The desec.io DDNS provider
class is now implemented analog to

http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=6ac5
56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805

for simultaneous IPv4/v6 updates as suggested by Michael.

Registering IPv4 and IPv6 addresses with the update.dedyn.io
server was successfully tested. Explicit unregistering will
still require updates on the server side.

Find attached the patches for src/ddns/providers.py
and ddns.conf.sample


-Jonas


On 07/31/2015 12:09 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 01:51 +0200, Jonas wrote:
>> Hello Michael,
>>
>>
>> in case of both IPv4 and IPv6 connection, the
>> query string in the update URL may contain
>> both a "myip" and a "myipv6" key simultaneously.
>> (for single protocol updates, "myip" may be used
>> for either protocol)
> That is actually a good idea to do, but that is not included in the
> reference documentation of the DynDNS protocol.
>
> We have implemented this for an other provider so you can simply copy
> those two lines and you are done:
>
> http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=6ac5
> 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805
>
>> As far as i understand the ddns sources, simultaneous
>> updates are not possible.
> They are. Just like the example above or this:
>
> http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=6ac5
> 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l1085
>
> Most providers just require sending two requests which is not the most
> preferable option, but what can you do?!
>
>> This may be resolved on the server side in the future.
> What is probably quite important is to properly clear any IPv4 or IPv6
> addresses when a system does not have connectivity to either one any
> more.
>
>> A possible workaround could be to always include
>> both addresses in the update URL, independent of
>> the "protocol" argument of the update method.
> Will you send me an updated patch then?
>
> -Michael
>
>> Kind regards,
>> Jonas
>>
>> On 07/30/2015 01:00 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
>>> Hello Jonas,
>>>
>>> thank you very much for sending in this patch. It looks really 
>>> good.
>>>
>>> I was just wondering if it wouldn't be better to implement IPv6 
>>> support
>>> properly. As far as I understand it, ddns will send two updates and 
>>> the
>>> second one will delete the updated data from the first one. In case 
>>> of
>>> a system having connectivity to the IPv6 and IPv4 Internet, the DNS
>>> record will just point to the IPv4 address. Correct me if I am 
>>> wrong
>>> here. Now it only works if a system has either IPv6 or IPv4
>>> connectivity.
>>>
>>> Let me know if we can solve this problem.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> -Michael
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 20:13 +0200, Jonas wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> i'd like to add support for the desec.io
>>>> dyndns service.
>>>>
>>>> It is DynDNS 2 compatible, so the patch is small.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Jonas
  

Hi Jonas,

thank you for taking the time. This patch looks good to me.

Acked-By: Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>

On Mon, 2015-08-31 at 18:11 +0200, Jonas wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 
> sorry for the delay. The desec.io DDNS provider
> class is now implemented analog to
> 
> http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=6a
> c5
> 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805
> 
> for simultaneous IPv4/v6 updates as suggested by Michael.
> 
> Registering IPv4 and IPv6 addresses with the update.dedyn.io
> server was successfully tested. Explicit unregistering will
> still require updates on the server side.

Most of the providers don't implement that and that is okay.

> Find attached the patches for src/ddns/providers.py
> and ddns.conf.sample

Stefan, would you please merge these patches after giving them good
testing?

@Jonas: If you want to promote out little ddns client, it will run on
other systems as well, not just IPFire. Maybe it needs some slight
modification on the one or the other distribution, but I think it is de
finitely worth being more widely used.

Best,
-Michael

> 
> 
> -Jonas
> 
> 
> On 07/31/2015 12:09 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 01:51 +0200, Jonas wrote:
> > > Hello Michael,
> > > 
> > > 
> > > in case of both IPv4 and IPv6 connection, the
> > > query string in the update URL may contain
> > > both a "myip" and a "myipv6" key simultaneously.
> > > (for single protocol updates, "myip" may be used
> > > for either protocol)
> > That is actually a good idea to do, but that is not included in the
> > reference documentation of the DynDNS protocol.
> > 
> > We have implemented this for an other provider so you can simply
> > copy
> > those two lines and you are done:
> > 
> > http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=
> > 6ac5
> > 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805
> > 
> > > As far as i understand the ddns sources, simultaneous
> > > updates are not possible.
> > They are. Just like the example above or this:
> > 
> > http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=
> > 6ac5
> > 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l1085
> > 
> > Most providers just require sending two requests which is not the
> > most
> > preferable option, but what can you do?!
> > 
> > > This may be resolved on the server side in the future.
> > What is probably quite important is to properly clear any IPv4 or
> > IPv6
> > addresses when a system does not have connectivity to either one
> > any
> > more.
> > 
> > > A possible workaround could be to always include
> > > both addresses in the update URL, independent of
> > > the "protocol" argument of the update method.
> > Will you send me an updated patch then?
> > 
> > -Michael
> > 
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Jonas
> > > 
> > > On 07/30/2015 01:00 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> > > > Hello Jonas,
> > > > 
> > > > thank you very much for sending in this patch. It looks really 
> > > > good.
> > > > 
> > > > I was just wondering if it wouldn't be better to implement IPv6
> > > > support
> > > > properly. As far as I understand it, ddns will send two updates
> > > > and 
> > > > the
> > > > second one will delete the updated data from the first one. In
> > > > case 
> > > > of
> > > > a system having connectivity to the IPv6 and IPv4 Internet, the
> > > > DNS
> > > > record will just point to the IPv4 address. Correct me if I am 
> > > > wrong
> > > > here. Now it only works if a system has either IPv6 or IPv4
> > > > connectivity.
> > > > 
> > > > Let me know if we can solve this problem.
> > > > 
> > > > Best,
> > > > -Michael
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 20:13 +0200, Jonas wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > i'd like to add support for the desec.io
> > > > > dyndns service.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It is DynDNS 2 compatible, so the patch is small.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Jonas
>
  

Hi Michael,

Frist I'd like to thank you for accepting Jonas' patch.

Our dedyn.io users most frequently ask how to update IP addresses when
their router *does not* support a dynamic DNS provider of their choice.
Usually, this is a Deutsche Telekom "Speedport" router. Also some
Netgear routers only support a build-in list of providers.

On 08/31/2015 06:37 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> @Jonas: If you want to promote out little ddns client, it will run on
> other systems as well, not just IPFire. Maybe it needs some slight
> modification on the one or the other distribution, but I think it is de
> finitely worth being more widely used.

I'd be happy to promote your client to enable our users to use the
dedyn.io service even if their router doesn't support dedyn.io. Are
there convenient to use packages for Ubuntu and other distros available?
(Any chance to support Windows?) If it does, we should make a short
guide available on our website on how to use it with dedyn.io.

Cheers,
Nils
  

Hi,

it has been a while -- are there any remaining
issues with the patch?

Regards,
Jonas

On 08/31/2015 06:37 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> Hi Jonas,
>
> thank you for taking the time. This patch looks good to me.
>
> Acked-By: Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>
>
> On Mon, 2015-08-31 at 18:11 +0200, Jonas wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> sorry for the delay. The desec.io DDNS provider
>> class is now implemented analog to
>>
>> http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=6a
>> c5
>> 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805
>>
>> for simultaneous IPv4/v6 updates as suggested by Michael.
>>
>> Registering IPv4 and IPv6 addresses with the update.dedyn.io
>> server was successfully tested. Explicit unregistering will
>> still require updates on the server side.
> Most of the providers don't implement that and that is okay.
>
>> Find attached the patches for src/ddns/providers.py
>> and ddns.conf.sample
> Stefan, would you please merge these patches after giving them good
> testing?
>
> @Jonas: If you want to promote out little ddns client, it will run on
> other systems as well, not just IPFire. Maybe it needs some slight
> modification on the one or the other distribution, but I think it is de
> finitely worth being more widely used.
>
> Best,
> -Michael
>
>>
>> -Jonas
>>
>>
>> On 07/31/2015 12:09 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 01:51 +0200, Jonas wrote:
>>>> Hello Michael,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> in case of both IPv4 and IPv6 connection, the
>>>> query string in the update URL may contain
>>>> both a "myip" and a "myipv6" key simultaneously.
>>>> (for single protocol updates, "myip" may be used
>>>> for either protocol)
>>> That is actually a good idea to do, but that is not included in the
>>> reference documentation of the DynDNS protocol.
>>>
>>> We have implemented this for an other provider so you can simply
>>> copy
>>> those two lines and you are done:
>>>
>>> http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=
>>> 6ac5
>>> 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805
>>>
>>>> As far as i understand the ddns sources, simultaneous
>>>> updates are not possible.
>>> They are. Just like the example above or this:
>>>
>>> http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=
>>> 6ac5
>>> 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l1085
>>>
>>> Most providers just require sending two requests which is not the
>>> most
>>> preferable option, but what can you do?!
>>>
>>>> This may be resolved on the server side in the future.
>>> What is probably quite important is to properly clear any IPv4 or
>>> IPv6
>>> addresses when a system does not have connectivity to either one
>>> any
>>> more.
>>>
>>>> A possible workaround could be to always include
>>>> both addresses in the update URL, independent of
>>>> the "protocol" argument of the update method.
>>> Will you send me an updated patch then?
>>>
>>> -Michael
>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Jonas
>>>>
>>>> On 07/30/2015 01:00 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
>>>>> Hello Jonas,
>>>>>
>>>>> thank you very much for sending in this patch. It looks really 
>>>>> good.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was just wondering if it wouldn't be better to implement IPv6
>>>>> support
>>>>> properly. As far as I understand it, ddns will send two updates
>>>>> and 
>>>>> the
>>>>> second one will delete the updated data from the first one. In
>>>>> case 
>>>>> of
>>>>> a system having connectivity to the IPv6 and IPv4 Internet, the
>>>>> DNS
>>>>> record will just point to the IPv4 address. Correct me if I am 
>>>>> wrong
>>>>> here. Now it only works if a system has either IPv6 or IPv4
>>>>> connectivity.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me know if we can solve this problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 20:13 +0200, Jonas wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i'd like to add support for the desec.io
>>>>>> dyndns service.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is DynDNS 2 compatible, so the patch is small.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Jonas
  

Hello,

not from my end. So this is ready to be merged with ddns if Stefan
approves.

-Michael

On Thu, 2015-10-08 at 21:56 +0200, Jonas wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> it has been a while -- are there any remaining
> issues with the patch?
> 
> Regards,
> Jonas
> 
> On 08/31/2015 06:37 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> > Hi Jonas,
> > 
> > thank you for taking the time. This patch looks good to me.
> > 
> > Acked-By: Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>
> > 
> > On Mon, 2015-08-31 at 18:11 +0200, Jonas wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > 
> > > sorry for the delay. The desec.io DDNS provider
> > > class is now implemented analog to
> > > 
> > > http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;
> > > h=6a
> > > c5
> > > 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805
> > > 
> > > for simultaneous IPv4/v6 updates as suggested by Michael.
> > > 
> > > Registering IPv4 and IPv6 addresses with the update.dedyn.io
> > > server was successfully tested. Explicit unregistering will
> > > still require updates on the server side.
> > Most of the providers don't implement that and that is okay.
> > 
> > > Find attached the patches for src/ddns/providers.py
> > > and ddns.conf.sample
> > Stefan, would you please merge these patches after giving them good
> > testing?
> > 
> > @Jonas: If you want to promote out little ddns client, it will run
> > on
> > other systems as well, not just IPFire. Maybe it needs some slight
> > modification on the one or the other distribution, but I think it
> > is de
> > finitely worth being more widely used.
> > 
> > Best,
> > -Michael
> > 
> > > 
> > > -Jonas
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 07/31/2015 12:09 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 01:51 +0200, Jonas wrote:
> > > > > Hello Michael,
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > in case of both IPv4 and IPv6 connection, the
> > > > > query string in the update URL may contain
> > > > > both a "myip" and a "myipv6" key simultaneously.
> > > > > (for single protocol updates, "myip" may be used
> > > > > for either protocol)
> > > > That is actually a good idea to do, but that is not included in
> > > > the
> > > > reference documentation of the DynDNS protocol.
> > > > 
> > > > We have implemented this for an other provider so you can
> > > > simply
> > > > copy
> > > > those two lines and you are done:
> > > > 
> > > > http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.p
> > > > y;h=
> > > > 6ac5
> > > > 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805
> > > > 
> > > > > As far as i understand the ddns sources, simultaneous
> > > > > updates are not possible.
> > > > They are. Just like the example above or this:
> > > > 
> > > > http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.p
> > > > y;h=
> > > > 6ac5
> > > > 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l1085
> > > > 
> > > > Most providers just require sending two requests which is not
> > > > the
> > > > most
> > > > preferable option, but what can you do?!
> > > > 
> > > > > This may be resolved on the server side in the future.
> > > > What is probably quite important is to properly clear any IPv4
> > > > or
> > > > IPv6
> > > > addresses when a system does not have connectivity to either
> > > > one
> > > > any
> > > > more.
> > > > 
> > > > > A possible workaround could be to always include
> > > > > both addresses in the update URL, independent of
> > > > > the "protocol" argument of the update method.
> > > > Will you send me an updated patch then?
> > > > 
> > > > -Michael
> > > > 
> > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > Jonas
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 07/30/2015 01:00 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> > > > > > Hello Jonas,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > thank you very much for sending in this patch. It looks
> > > > > > really 
> > > > > > good.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I was just wondering if it wouldn't be better to implement
> > > > > > IPv6
> > > > > > support
> > > > > > properly. As far as I understand it, ddns will send two
> > > > > > updates
> > > > > > and 
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > second one will delete the updated data from the first one.
> > > > > > In
> > > > > > case 
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > a system having connectivity to the IPv6 and IPv4 Internet,
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > DNS
> > > > > > record will just point to the IPv4 address. Correct me if I
> > > > > > am 
> > > > > > wrong
> > > > > > here. Now it only works if a system has either IPv6 or IPv4
> > > > > > connectivity.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Let me know if we can solve this problem.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > -Michael
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 20:13 +0200, Jonas wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > i'd like to add support for the desec.io
> > > > > > > dyndns service.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > It is DynDNS 2 compatible, so the patch is small.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > Jonas
>
  

Hello Jonas,

thanks for the patch, your changes already have been merged into DDNS.

http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=commit;h=d1a5be9e002a6c2b6757ef70a1
decb5c4a20e404

Best regards,

-Stefan

> Hello,
> 
> not from my end. So this is ready to be merged with ddns if Stefan
> approves.
> 
> -Michael
> 
> On Thu, 2015-10-08 at 21:56 +0200, Jonas wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > it has been a while -- are there any remaining
> > issues with the patch?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Jonas
> > 
> > On 08/31/2015 06:37 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> > > Hi Jonas,
> > > 
> > > thank you for taking the time. This patch looks good to me.
> > > 
> > > Acked-By: Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>
> > > 
> > > On Mon, 2015-08-31 at 18:11 +0200, Jonas wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > sorry for the delay. The desec.io DDNS provider
> > > > class is now implemented analog to
> > > > 
> > > > http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.p
> > > > y;
> > > > h=6a
> > > > c5
> > > > 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805
> > > > 
> > > > for simultaneous IPv4/v6 updates as suggested by Michael.
> > > > 
> > > > Registering IPv4 and IPv6 addresses with the update.dedyn.io
> > > > server was successfully tested. Explicit unregistering will
> > > > still require updates on the server side.
> > > Most of the providers don't implement that and that is okay.
> > > 
> > > > Find attached the patches for src/ddns/providers.py
> > > > and ddns.conf.sample
> > > Stefan, would you please merge these patches after giving them
> > > good
> > > testing?
> > > 
> > > @Jonas: If you want to promote out little ddns client, it will
> > > run
> > > on
> > > other systems as well, not just IPFire. Maybe it needs some
> > > slight
> > > modification on the one or the other distribution, but I think it
> > > is de
> > > finitely worth being more widely used.
> > > 
> > > Best,
> > > -Michael
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > -Jonas
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On 07/31/2015 12:09 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 01:51 +0200, Jonas wrote:
> > > > > > Hello Michael,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > in case of both IPv4 and IPv6 connection, the
> > > > > > query string in the update URL may contain
> > > > > > both a "myip" and a "myipv6" key simultaneously.
> > > > > > (for single protocol updates, "myip" may be used
> > > > > > for either protocol)
> > > > > That is actually a good idea to do, but that is not included
> > > > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > reference documentation of the DynDNS protocol.
> > > > > 
> > > > > We have implemented this for an other provider so you can
> > > > > simply
> > > > > copy
> > > > > those two lines and you are done:
> > > > > 
> > > > > http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers
> > > > > .p
> > > > > y;h=
> > > > > 6ac5
> > > > > 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805
> > > > > 
> > > > > > As far as i understand the ddns sources, simultaneous
> > > > > > updates are not possible.
> > > > > They are. Just like the example above or this:
> > > > > 
> > > > > http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers
> > > > > .p
> > > > > y;h=
> > > > > 6ac5
> > > > > 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l1085
> > > > > 
> > > > > Most providers just require sending two requests which is not
> > > > > the
> > > > > most
> > > > > preferable option, but what can you do?!
> > > > > 
> > > > > > This may be resolved on the server side in the future.
> > > > > What is probably quite important is to properly clear any
> > > > > IPv4
> > > > > or
> > > > > IPv6
> > > > > addresses when a system does not have connectivity to either
> > > > > one
> > > > > any
> > > > > more.
> > > > > 
> > > > > > A possible workaround could be to always include
> > > > > > both addresses in the update URL, independent of
> > > > > > the "protocol" argument of the update method.
> > > > > Will you send me an updated patch then?
> > > > > 
> > > > > -Michael
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > > Jonas
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On 07/30/2015 01:00 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> > > > > > > Hello Jonas,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > thank you very much for sending in this patch. It looks
> > > > > > > really 
> > > > > > > good.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I was just wondering if it wouldn't be better to
> > > > > > > implement
> > > > > > > IPv6
> > > > > > > support
> > > > > > > properly. As far as I understand it, ddns will send two
> > > > > > > updates
> > > > > > > and 
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > second one will delete the updated data from the first
> > > > > > > one.
> > > > > > > In
> > > > > > > case 
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > a system having connectivity to the IPv6 and IPv4
> > > > > > > Internet,
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > DNS
> > > > > > > record will just point to the IPv4 address. Correct me if
> > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > am 
> > > > > > > wrong
> > > > > > > here. Now it only works if a system has either IPv6 or
> > > > > > > IPv4
> > > > > > > connectivity.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Let me know if we can solve this problem.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > -Michael
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 20:13 +0200, Jonas wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > i'd like to add support for the desec.io
> > > > > > > > dyndns service.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > It is DynDNS 2 compatible, so the patch is small.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > Jonas