More discussion here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/WireGuard/comments/12oimvq/how_to_optimize_allowedips_overlapping_routes/
Clearly this is FAQ-ish kind of thing. It was a little hard for me to
easily find a reference for this kind of stuff. I realize the WireGuard
project may not consider it to be their responsibility to address such
things.
~J
On 2023-04-16 10:06 AM, Johnny Utahh wrote:
1. wg0.conf: AllowedIPs = 0.0.0.0/0, ::0/0 --> higher-latency network
2. wg1.conf: AllowedIPs = 192.168.7.0/24 --> much-lower-latency network
When enabling both of the devices/.conf's (listed as 1. and 2. above)
concurrently, the #2 route travels over #1 (all starting up via
'wg-quick'). In this scenario I'd prefer #2 routing "bypasses" #1 and
retain its (#2's) lower-latency path/network. Can this be done, somehow?
I deduce the "route" for #2 changes when concurrently-enabling #1
because the #2-ping-latency immediately and dramatically increases to
match #1-network's latency (and immediately reverts to #2's lower
latency when #1 is disabled). This hurts my #2 network, badly.
I'm running/testing the above on macOS v12.6.3 build 21G419,
wireguard-go v0.0.20230223. If not on macOS, might this be feasible on
Fedora or Ubuntu?
I realize this might be a FAQ. I could not find any docs/resources to
help after a brief search, so I'm posting here.
[I'm not a networking expert, so I may be butchering various
terminology, concepts. I apologize in advance for my ignorance.]
~J
