[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5776827F.8010306@nod.at>
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 16:47:27 +0200
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] WireGuard: next generation secure network tunnel
Jason,
Am 01.07.2016 um 16:25 schrieb Jason A. Donenfeld:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Richard Weinberger
> <richard.weinberger@...il.com> wrote:
>> So every logical tunnel will allocate a new net device?
>> Doesn't this scale badly? I have ipsec alike setups
>> with many, many road warriors in mind.
>
> No, this isn't the case. Each net device has multiple peers. Check out
> the example config on the website, pasted here for convenience:
>
>> [Interface]
>> PrivateKey = yAnz5TF+lXXJte14tji3zlMNq+hd2rYUIgJBgB3fBmk=
>> ListenPort = 41414
>>
>> [Peer]
>> PublicKey = xTIBA5rboUvnH4htodjb6e697QjLERt1NAB4mZqp8Dg=
>> AllowedIPs = 10.192.122.3/32, 10.192.124.1/24
>>
>> [Peer]
>> PublicKey = TrMvSoP4jYQlY6RIzBgbssQqY3vxI2Pi+y71lOWWXX0=
>> AllowedIPs = 10.192.122.4/32, 192.168.0.0/16
>>
>> [Peer]
>> PublicKey = gN65BkIKy1eCE9pP1wdc8ROUtkHLF2PfAqYdyYBz6EA=
>> AllowedIPs = 10.10.10.230/32
>
> If that file is example.conf, you could set up a single device like this:
>
> $ ip link add dev wg0 type wireguard
> $ wg setconf wg0 example.conf
>
> That single netdev is now configured to communicate with several peers.
>
> I hope this clarifies things. Let me know if you have further questions.
Yes. Makes sense. :-)
Thanks,
//richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists