We touched this topic during the PTG, but it seems that there was nobody from the participants who would like to maintain neutron-vpnaas, so I sent out a mail asking for help:

Lajos Katona (lajoskatona)

Christian Rohmann <christian.rohmann@inovex.de> ezt írta (időpont: 2022. ápr. 11., H, 11:00):
Hey Lajos,

On 21/03/2022 11:12, Lajos Katona wrote:
Hi Christian,
Thanks for your efforts for reproduction.
I will bring this topic to the team meeting tomorrow (https://meetings.opendev.org/#Neutron_Team_Meeting ):

Regarding your frustration, I totally understand it. It is, I think can be a topic for the coming PTG.

1) First thanks again for raising issue of a lack of maintainers for VPNaaS at https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/networking/2022/networking.2022-03-22-14.06.log.html#l-62.
Were there any more take-aways from your PTG discussion if I may ask?

Is there any chance anybody might look at our reported and DevStack-reproduced issue about the duplicate IPtable rules (https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1943449) ?
Do you need more info of any kind?

2) If there is a way forward for keeping VPNaaS ...

 * Will OVN receive support at some point? https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron-vpnaas/+/765353

3) More protocols?

Are there any plans on extending on the types as currently only IPSEC is supported (https://opendev.org/openstack/neutron-vpnaas/src/branch/master/neutron_vpnaas/services/vpn/device_drivers).
I was thinking about Wireguard which is also built into the linux kernel and saw amazing pick-up in recent times. Even consumer devices use it now as it's MUCH simpler than IPSEC.