4 ms·
Unfortunate that Cloudflare didn't just contribute time to the first party wireguard-rs client. But it's their wish to do what they want with their engineers.
by atonse 8y ago
Unfortunate that Cloudflare didn't just contribute time to the first party wireguard-rs client. But it's their wish to do what they want with their engineers.
Nonetheless, it's great that Wireguard have a path to a solid user space implementation that others could build from.
Jason Donenfeld's post about this surprised me when he said the go implementation is flaky. Is the health of the non-kernel parts of wireguard not great? The macOS clients work really well for me.
- zx2c4 8y agoThe Go implementation is fine. I don't think you have much to worry about. But we're pretty frequently running into limitations and fighting with the runtime; we've submitted quite a few random patches to it. I think Rust is probably a better-suited language for a high performance and relatively secure WireGuard implementation. Hence, we'd really like to have a strong first-party Rust implementation for the project.
- BFLpL0QNek 8y agoHaven't looked at the other implementations yet but with wireguard-go I've been struggling to run it as non root on OpenBSD. I've created a _wireguard user+group, setup a /dev/tun0 interface to have the _wireguard group with read/write however from the little tracing i've done it looks like I still need root when it tries to do the unix sys call to set the MTU.