Re: [Warning: DMARC Fail Email] Re: ipv6 connexion fail - ipv4 OK

2021-08-27 Thread Mike O'Connor
root@gw:~# ping -M do -s 1472 13.17.1.2 PING 103.127.123.217 (13.17.1.2) 1472(1500) bytes of data. 1480 bytes from 13.17.1.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=7.93 ms Link can transmit a max of 1500 bytes as seen above. Pinging a LAN segment has the same limit. ie PC to PC has the same result. Mike On

Re: [Warning: DMARC Fail Email] Re: ipv6 connexion fail - ipv4 OK

2021-08-27 Thread Roman Mamedov
On Sat, 28 Aug 2021 07:05:45 +0930 Mike O'Connor wrote: > On a 1500 link I'm having to use 1280 to get ipv6 to successfully go > over a wireguard link. Then it is not a true 1500 MTU link, something in-between drops packets at a lower bar. Or maybe not all of them, but just UDP, for example.

Re: [Warning: DMARC Fail Email] Re: ipv6 connexion fail - ipv4 OK

2021-08-27 Thread Mike O'Connor
Hi On a 1500 link I'm having to use 1280 to get ipv6 to successfully go over a wireguard link. I really think wireguard should be able to fragment and send via multiply UDP packets. wireguard works very well other than this issue, performance is extremely good. Mike On 28/8/21 2:46 am,

Re: ipv6 connexion fail - ipv4 OK

2021-08-27 Thread Daniel
Hi ROman Le 27/08/2021 à 18:14, Roman Mamedov a écrit : On Thu, 26 Aug 2021 13:14:00 +0200 Daniel wrote: Correction Le 25/08/2021 à 17:25, Daniel a écrit : Hi list, I setup wireguard on a server running Debian 11 and get it to work with 2 clients (Debian 11 and Ubuntu 20.04). Clients and

Re: ipv6 connexion fail - ipv4 OK

2021-08-27 Thread Daniel
Correction Le 25/08/2021 à 17:25, Daniel a écrit : Hi list, I setup wireguard on a server running Debian 11 and get it to work with 2 clients (Debian 11 and Ubuntu 20.04). Clients and server are on separate networks, one client behind a FW the other direct on Internet, no FW at all (VPS).

Re: ipv6 connexion fail - ipv4 OK

2021-08-27 Thread Roman Mamedov
On Thu, 26 Aug 2021 13:14:00 +0200 Daniel wrote: > Correction > > Le 25/08/2021 à 17:25, Daniel a écrit : > > Hi list, > > > > I setup wireguard on a server running Debian 11 and get it to work with > > 2 clients (Debian 11 and Ubuntu 20.04). Clients and server are on > > separate networks,

Re: wintun0.13 memmod load fails in windows10 (wintun 0.12 loads fine)

2021-08-27 Thread Gopakumar Choorakkot Edakkunni
oh well I guess I dont need a new wintun, but just the new wireguard go. Sorry I misread it, will try that Rgds, Gopa. On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 10:40 AM Gopakumar Choorakkot Edakkunni wrote: > > Thanks for the response Jason. My reason for trying 0.13 version was > because I "thought" 0.12 had

Re: wintun0.13 memmod load fails in windows10 (wintun 0.12 loads fine)

2021-08-27 Thread Gopakumar Choorakkot Edakkunni
Thanks for the response Jason. My reason for trying 0.13 version was because I "thought" 0.12 had some issue because I was seeing random packet loss (I had another email thread for it) - but then I figured the random loss was because I was doing a device.New()/device.UP AND also reading wintun

Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] selftests/wireguard: Rename DEBUG_PI_LIST to DEBUG_PLIST

2021-08-27 Thread Jason A. Donenfeld
Hi, On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 3:54 AM Li Zhijian wrote: > > DEBUG_PI_LIST was renamed to DEBUG_PLIST since 8e18faeac3 ("lib/plist: rename > DEBUG_PI_LIST to DEBUG_PLIST") Thanks for the patch. I've queued this up in my wireguard-linux.git tree for some rounds of CI, and I'll send it back out in

Re: wintun0.13 memmod load fails in windows10 (wintun 0.12 loads fine)

2021-08-27 Thread Jason A. Donenfeld
Update to the latest wireguard-go commit. https://git.zx2c4.com/wireguard-go/commit/?id=bad6caeb82edd0e22bdbcfa1ca544a5805109e14

wintun0.13 memmod load fails in windows10 (wintun 0.12 loads fine)

2021-08-27 Thread Gopakumar Choorakkot Edakkunni
In memmod_windows.go, the program exits when calling syscall.Syscall(module.entry, 3, module.codeBase, uintptr(DLL_PROCESS_ATTACH), 0) module.entry = 0x18000a660 module.codebase = 0x18000 I I just swap out wintun 0.13 with wintun0.12, the load / syscall works just fine, just for reference

[PATCH v2 3/3] selftests/wireguard: Rename DEBUG_PI_LIST to DEBUG_PLIST

2021-08-27 Thread Li Zhijian
DEBUG_PI_LIST was renamed to DEBUG_PLIST since 8e18faeac3 ("lib/plist: rename DEBUG_PI_LIST to DEBUG_PLIST") CC: "Jason A. Donenfeld" CC: Nick Desaulniers CC: Masahiro Yamada CC: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com CC: net...@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Li Zhijian ---

[PATCH v2 0/3] kselftests: clean configs

2021-08-27 Thread Li Zhijian
0Day will check if all configs listing under selftests are able to be enabled properly. For the missing configs, it will report something like: LKP WARN miss config CONFIG_SYNC= of sync/config CC: kernel test robot CC: "Jason A. Donenfeld" CC: Nick Desaulniers CC: Masahiro Yamada CC:

wireguard-windows: packets dropped in NativeTun Read()

2021-08-27 Thread Gopakumar Choorakkot Edakkunni
Hi, I am experimenting with wintun as the choice of my driver for a vpn client I am writing on windows. I was very quickly able to get bootstrapped using the wireguard-windows repository (thanks!!), I created a tunnel and when I use the Read() api (tun_windows.go), I see that quite often I am

[PATCH] selftests: cleanup config

2021-08-27 Thread Li Zhijian
- DEBUG_PI_LIST was renamed to DEBUG_PLIST since 8e18faeac3 ("lib/plist: rename DEBUG_PI_LIST to DEBUG_PLIST") - SYNC was removed since aff9da10e21 ("staging/android: make sync_timeline internal to sw_sync") $ for k in $(grep ^CONFIG $(find tools/testing/selftests/ -name config) | awk -F'='