4 ms·
I hope wireguard improves it’s tooling. It feels a bit crude for me.
by maallooc 7y ago
I hope wireguard improves it’s tooling. It feels a bit crude for me.
- Jonnax 7y agoI guess so. But at the same time. After setting it up to connect into my home network, I'm just surprised at how well it works.
- jamescun 7y agoThe tooling right now is pretty much directly exposing the underlying netlink api, so can seem a little clunky. wg-quick does go someway to making it more userfriendly. WireGuard has been very pro-active at adopting useful abstractions, personally I've used https://github.com/WireGuard/wgctrl-go https://github.com/WireGuard/wgctrl-go to build https://github.com/jamescun/wg-api https://github.com/jamescun/wg-api a JSONRPC server for WireGuard, so expect tooling to improve over time.
- naggie 7y agoI felt the same so I made https://github.com/naggie/dsnet https://github.com/naggie/dsnet -- just a simple CLI tool to add/remove peers, generating config.
- Improvotter 7y agoYou can use networkd to make it easier, if you like using systemd that is.
- jeltz 7y agoDepends on what you are doing. For my use cases I strongly preferred the wireguard tooling to the OpenVPN tooling, but the Wireguard ecosystem is still missing many features.
- jrockway 7y agoI think that people are looking for Wireguard to be something that it isn't. It's a fancy Ethernet cable, that's all. You can build a lot of neat things on top of Ethernet cables, like full networks. But it's not the cable that builds the network, it's just a low-level tool for facilitating that construction. If you want to do something like make a point-to-point VPN, then wg-quick is that layer on top. If you want to build a mesh network from endpoints authenticated with a third-party identity provider, you want something like Tailscale. Wireguard is just a low-level building block that handles the crypto in those use cases; making something high-level is left as an exercise to the reader.