Hi Adrian,
As SIDE_B has a public IP address, the example you give should work fine. In
this case, SIDE_A will establish a connection with SIDE_B which effectively
punches a NAT hole for return traffic from SIDE_B to SIDE_A.
When configuring the SIDE_A peer on SIDE_B, just leave EndPoint
https://git.zx2c4.com/WireGuard/tree/contrib/examples/nat-hole-punching
___
WireGuard mailing list
WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard
Is there any way to connect to Wireguard behind a Carrier-grade NAT?
On SIDE_A I have a backup LTE connection, without proper public ip, only
dynamic ip and I server with Wireguard.
SIDE_A = mobile LTE connection, without public IP, behind carrier grade NAT
SIDE_A_SERVER = WIREGUARD (connecting
On 9/3/18 12:55 PM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 12:43:19 +0200
Ole-Morten Duesund wrote:
Adding a "PersistentKeepalive = 5" to your config on SIDE_A_SERVER
should keep the connection up.
Do you encounter any difference between 5, 25 and 55, only 5 works for you? If
not, setting
On 9/3/18 12:28 PM, Adrián Mihálko wrote:
Is there any way to connect to Wireguard behind a Carrier-grade NAT?
On SIDE_A I have a backup LTE connection, without proper public ip, only
dynamic ip and I server with Wireguard.
SIDE_A = mobile LTE connection, without public IP, behind carrier
Is there any way to connect to Wireguard behind a Carrier-grade NAT?
On SIDE_A I have a backup LTE connection, without proper public ip, only
dynamic ip and I server with Wireguard.
SIDE_A = mobile LTE connection, without public IP, behind carrier grade NAT
SIDE_A_SERVER = WIREGUARD (connecting
If you can have SIDE_A connect to SIDE_B and enable
persistent-keepalive, that should take care of things mostly. If you
can't do that for whatever reason, there are hole punching tricks like
[1] and [2].
[1] https://git.zx2c4.com/WireGuard/tree/contrib/examples/nat-hole-punching
[2]
