Re: IPv6-only flag set on v6 sockets prevents the use of v4-mapped addresses

2023-08-19 Thread Daniel Gröber
Hi Nathaniel, On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 07:48:04AM +0100, Nathaniel Filardo wrote: > This means that v4-mapped v6 addresses (:::a.b.c.d) can be > registered as peer endpoints, but the kernel very silently won't try > to reach out. Is that deliberate for some reason that eludes me? If > it is,

[RFC] Replace WireGuard AllowedIPs with IP route attribute

2023-08-19 Thread Daniel Gröber
Hi wireguard, birds, and babelers, tl;dr I want to add a new Linux route attribute (think "via $wgpeer") to supplement wireguard's internal AllowedIPs logic for both routing and source address filtering. I've been pondering how to better integrate wireguard into dynamic routing daemons, particula

Re: IPv6-only flag set on v6 sockets prevents the use of v4-mapped addresses

2023-08-19 Thread Nathaniel Filardo
Hi Daniel, DNS absolutely can and does store and return those addresses; look at mapped46.test.ietfng.org for an example ( :::1.2.3.4). In my use case they arise because I have scripts that take wireguard peer addresses and register them with my DNS service provider, and it's simpler to up

Re: [RFC] Replace WireGuard AllowedIPs with IP route attribute

2023-08-19 Thread Daniel Gröber
Hi Bernd, On Sat, Aug 19, 2023 at 07:50:38PM +0200, Bernd Naumann wrote: > Chances are high I do miss something, but I've just set AllowedIPs to > 0.0.0.0/0 and ::/0 and just used the routing protocol of my choice and > filters to select which routes got exported and imported... :shrug: Right, le

Re: IPv6-only flag set on v6 sockets prevents the use of v4-mapped addresses

2023-08-19 Thread Daniel Gröber
Hi Nathaniel, On Sat, Aug 19, 2023 at 05:34:00PM +0100, Nathaniel Filardo wrote: > DNS absolutely can and does I mean I can (and used to) enter fe80::/64 link local addressess into DNS but it turns out this is actually forbidden by the RFCs but nothing will stop you. I'm not convinced putting ::f

Re: [Babel-users] [RFC] Replace WireGuard AllowedIPs with IP route attribute

2023-08-19 Thread Steffen Vogel
Hi Daniel, Interesting ideas! I am wondering if this complexity is really necessary? How many routes do you have per peer? In my personal setup I have maximum of 1-100 routes per peer which I can handle with the current API quite comfortably. My biggest concern about the introduction of a route

Option to enable policy routing

2023-08-19 Thread Kyle Rose
I really like the straightforward configurability of Wireguard out-of-the-box. It was astonishingly easy to configure a mesh to replace my previous hub-and-spoke OpenVPN setup. Thank you for making this easy. That said, I'd like the ability to use Linux's policy routing engine to allow for more co

Wireguard Dynamic ARP entries

2023-08-19 Thread Diyaa Alkanakre
Hello everyone, I am seeing lots of ARP dynamic entries on Windows when typing "arp -a" on the command line on windows. I am wondering if that is a normal behavior? when I set a wireguard peer with a default route "0.0.0.0/0, ::/0" I end up spending about 2 minutes to get to the bottom of the C

Re: [PATCH] treewide: drop CONFIG_EMBEDDED

2023-08-19 Thread Jesse Taube
Hi, Randy > diff -- a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig > --- a/init/Kconfig > +++ b/init/Kconfig > @@ -1790,14 +1790,6 @@ config DEBUG_RSEQ > > If unsure, say N. > > -config EMBEDDED > - bool "Embedded system" > - select EXPERT > - help > -This option should be enabled if compiling the ker

Re: [PATCH] treewide: drop CONFIG_EMBEDDED

2023-08-19 Thread Michael Ellerman
Randy Dunlap writes: > There is only one Kconfig user of CONFIG_EMBEDDED and it can be > switched to EXPERT or "if !ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM" (suggested by Arnd). > > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap ... > arch/powerpc/configs/40x/klondike_defconfig |2 +- > arch/powerpc/configs/44x/fsp2_defco

Re: [PATCH] treewide: drop CONFIG_EMBEDDED

2023-08-19 Thread Jesse T
On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 7:44 PM Randy Dunlap wrote: > > Hi Jesse, > > I replied to your comment a few days ago, but for some reason > your email to me contains: > Reply-To: 20230816055010.31534-1-rdun...@infradead.org > so it wasn't sent directly to you. Sorry about that I messed up the email hea

Re: [PATCH] treewide: drop CONFIG_EMBEDDED

2023-08-19 Thread Christophe Leroy
Hi, Le 19/08/2023 à 05:33, Jesse T a écrit : >>> Should there be a warning here to update change it instead of removal? >>> >>> kconfig doesn't have a warning mechanism AFAIK. >>> Do you have an idea of how this would work? > > No, unfortunately. As you said without a warning it would be ove

allowed-ips: separation of concerns, routing and firewalling

2023-08-19 Thread Kim Nilsson
Hello wireguard project, I am currently working on several projects that make use of wireguard as part of a larger networking scheme. Since there are many details about tunneling, network routing, and firewalling that are considered must-know for many of my coworkers I recently had to make a

Re: [RFC] Replace WireGuard AllowedIPs with IP route attribute

2023-08-19 Thread Kyle Rose
Daniel, I attempted several times to send the following message to the mailing list nearly two months ago, but they all landed in moderation for some reason and were silently dropped after a few days. You are not the only one who wants this functionality for mesh VPNs. I note the email you subsequ

Re: [Babel-users] [RFC] Replace WireGuard AllowedIPs with IP route attribute

2023-08-19 Thread Daniel Gröber
Hi Steffen, from the questions you ask I fear you've misunderstood my intention to "replace" AllowedIPs. I'm strictly talking of the _implementation_ (allowedips.c) in Linux particular. The netlink interface would naturally stay unchanged. On Sat, Aug 19, 2023 at 10:00:17PM +0200, Steffen Vogel w