8 ms·
This is a big step forward! I'm hoping that the 1.0 release will prompt Netgate to consider inclusion in pfSense.
by F00Fbug 7y ago
This is a big step forward!
I'm hoping that the 1.0 release will prompt Netgate to consider inclusion in pfSense.
- LeoPanthera 7y agoYes! The fact that it's not in pfSense is pretty much the only reason why I'm still using openvpn.
- vocatus_gate 7y agoSame with OPNSense.
- chrissnell 7y agoWireguard is available as a plugin in Opnsense. I use it regularly.
- loeg 7y agopfSense is a FreeBSD downstream, right? First you'd have to port Wireguard to FreeBSD. Or you could run the userspace server, but expect poor performance.
- amarshall 7y agoUserspace already has a package https://www.freshports.org/net/wireguard/ https://www.freshports.org/net/wireguard/
- stock_toaster 7y agoBoringtun (cloudflare's rust implementation of wireguard in userspace) also has work in progress FreeBSD support apparent[1]. [1]: https://github.com/cloudflare/boringtun/pull/35 https://github.com/cloudflare/boringtun/pull/35
- loeg 7y agoYes, I know; I use it myself. It's not the same thing as a kernel C implementation.
- F00Fbug 7y agoExactly. Netgate has long said that they won't touch it until it's production-ready; they keep pointing to the warning messages in WireGuard saying that it's beta and when the time is right, they'll consider it. I'm happy they're being cautious. The inclusion in the Linux kernel is perhaps (to Netgate) a sign that things are headed in the right direction. As far as FreeBSD, all that exists today is a userspace package (AFAIK). Again, I'm hoping someone sees this as a step forward and will start working on the FreeBSD port. I'm glad to see progress and hoping for more of it!