Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WireGuard is submitted for Linux kernel inclusion

marc.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 189 posts

Re: WireGuard is submitted for Linux kernel inclusion

#21

Post by phaer »

simias wrote: post #18
ofrzeta wrote: post #2

Great news. I started using Wireguard instead of OpenVPN and won't look back. Actually it was easy to set up even with DKMS kernel modules but having it in mainline will be great.

Can you explain what makes it better than venerable old OpenVPN?

Mostly speed, a more minimal configuration syntax, more modern crypto.

OpenVPN works fine, is quite portable and runs in user space. It's quite a lot slower, but is well-tested and can be managed with a Certificate Authority in organisation where that's desired.

Re: WireGuard is submitted for Linux kernel inclusion

#22

Post by majewsky »

simias wrote: post #18
ofrzeta wrote: post #2

Great news. I started using Wireguard instead of OpenVPN and won't look back. Actually it was easy to set up even with DKMS kernel modules but having it in mainline will be great.

Can you explain what makes it better than venerable old OpenVPN?

Thomas Ptacek does it better than me: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14599834

Re: WireGuard is submitted for Linux kernel inclusion

#25

Post by alias_neo »

StavrosK wrote: post #11

I started using Wireguard two days ago to access my home LAN and love it, I can access everything with one command, as if I'm home. The only problem I have with it is the complete lack of documentation. The tutorial refers to a configuration file, but nowhere on the site does it tell you how to write one. It also took me days to set up what I think is a common use case, logging in to a server/router at home and acces…

I agree. I've been using Wireguard for about 6 months now. The quick start is great for getting a quick overview but it doesn't really document properly how a configuration file should be made.

There is no real detail about how a wg-quick config differs from a wg one, and they're not compatible; it'll complain about unknown keys/values or something if you use a wg-quick config with extra firewall rules and the like with plain wg.

I also saw nothing anywhere about how if you modify your config file and down/up with wg-quick it'll delete anything you entered in your config as the 'down' will write back the current state of the interface. It's not a big deal, but it messes with the usual workflow of editing the config file of a service (you don't want to down it while updating your config, which could take time).

otherwise, wg has been great, it is generally quite reliable on Android but I'd like to see an easier way of doing the exclusions, inverse CIDRs are not my forte.

Re: WireGuard is submitted for Linux kernel inclusion

#26

Post by louiskottmann »

StavrosK wrote: post #11

I started using Wireguard two days ago to access my home LAN and love it, I can access everything with one command, as if I'm home. The only problem I have with it is the complete lack of documentation. The tutorial refers to a configuration file, but nowhere on the site does it tell you how to write one. It also took me days to set up what I think is a common use case, logging in to a server/router at home and acces…

I actually gave up after trying for a while. They mention an "easy" way to do traditional VPN usage, but it never worked, and various blogs have differing opinions on how to properly do that.

I wish there was better hands-on documentation for WG, but I guess it really is an addition to iptables and thus restricted to people versed in that area. Which I am not.

I do intend to try again though.

Re: WireGuard is submitted for Linux kernel inclusion

#28

Post by esistgut »

jwilk wrote: post #20
brewrwe wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on what you stated, I assume this VPS is running on OpenVZ? If so, I doubt it will ever see newer kernel features, in part due to OpenVZ hosts relying on ancient LTS kernel branches and also due to OpenVZ "optimizations", whereby kernel features that use extra resources to enable just get disabled. Or, if your lucky they'll give you a button to re-enable them for youe container on an ad-hoc basis. Heads up, $20…

Where do you get these $20/y deals?

arubacloud.com has KVM based VPSes starting at 1€/month.

Re: WireGuard is submitted for Linux kernel inclusion

#29

Post by ZoomZoomZoom »

ryanlol wrote: post #14
StavrosK wrote: post #11

I started using Wireguard two days ago to access my home LAN and love it, I can access everything with one command, as if I'm home. The only problem I have with it is the complete lack of documentation. The tutorial refers to a configuration file, but nowhere on the site does it tell you how to write one. It also took me days to set up what I think is a common use case, logging in to a server/router at home and acces…

I've been using wg for over a year now and never had any difficulty finding documentation. `man wg` works just fine as does `man wg-quick` https://www.wireguard.com/quickstart/ also shows you how to make a config file

The problem is that a regular user [some of them] can follow documentation, set up a server and a client, use wg to connect them and may be even ping the connection. That's it, congratulations.

How is this connection can be used? Which IPs should be used to establish a useful connection? How can a user see their LAN resources through it? How can a user route his web browsing through this connection (here we at least have wg-quick)? And so on.

This information is lacking, and WG documentation is not the sole offender.

Post reply on HN