Hi there, my name is Thomas Gschwantner and this is my report for the work I've
done on WireGuard, for the GSoC 2018.
Before GSoC even started proper, Jason asked us to work on a small fix regarding
the endianness of the trie used to store IPs in `allowedips.c`. Previously,
they'd be stored in ne
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:46 AM Riccardo Paolo Bestetti
wrote:
>
> I laughed in my head. :)
>
> For what my two cents are worth, L2 WireGuard would have its (limited) use
> cases, but nothing beats having a simple and effective mono-purpose protocol
> like we do now. Everything else can be solv
On 27.08.2018 16:46, Riccardo Paolo Bestetti wrote:
> The tunnel could be initially established with no tunnel addresses,
It could also be initially established with one non-forwarded tunnel
address, allowing you to converse through the tunnel with standard
tools, and without adding unnecessary co
I laughed in my head. :)
For what my two cents are worth, L2 WireGuard would have its (limited) use
cases, but nothing beats having a simple and effective mono-purpose protocol
like we do now. Everything else can be solved with OpenVPN or appropriate SDN
techniques running on top of WG.
And a
On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 15:32:49 +0200
netrav...@gmail.com wrote:
> When using multicast over WireGuard, would it not be more viable to use
> an extra encapsulation layer to run multicast inside of?
>
> I am specifically thinking of running either GRE or L2TPv3 over wgX.
I know people run VXLAN or o
Hello,
I am trying to get IPv6 link-local IPs and route advertisements to work over
WG. The reason is not for the usual case of address autoconfiguration, but to
use RA as a dynamic routing protocol of sorts, as it can distribute routes --
or in case of WG (where routes need to be static in Allowe
