4 ms·

It’s a shit show. Can’t trace packets either via wireshark on the host and tcpdump doesn’t work on the guest. I’ve gone back to virtualbox and eviscerated WSL.

by qz2 6y ago

It’s a shit show. Can’t trace packets either via wireshark on the host and tcpdump doesn’t work on the guest. I’ve gone back to virtualbox and eviscerated WSL. Another total waste of my life.

debian_lover 6y ago
Better yet just install linux and if you need windows, use it in a locked down VM
GekkePrutser 6y ago
Conceptually this makes sense. It doesn't really run Under windows, it runs beside windows. Unlike WSL1 which was basically part of Windows. It's strange tcpdump doesn't run though as WSL2 is running a real kernel. Personally I really liked the resource efficient WSL1 approach and I lament that they dropped it. But I know for some usecases (e.g. docker) a real Linux kernel was needed.
- muststopmyths 6y ago
  >It's strange tcpdump doesn't run though as WSL2 is running a real kernel. It works just fine. Just tested it
  - qz2 6y ago
    Try dumping UDP packets from the host to the WSL machine...
    - tw04 6y ago
      The WSL machine is a Hyper-V VM. Why would you expect the default configuration to be able to sniff traffic from the host operating system? That would be a massive security hole.
      - qz2 6y ago
        I’m taking about traffic sent to the guest not on the interfaces.
- rrdharan 6y ago
  It was theoretically more resource efficient but practically worse and harder to optimize. A state of affairs that VMware has exploited for a couple decades.
muricula 6y ago
Were you using WSL 1 or 2? WSL 1 networking didn't work the way I expected, but WSL 2 seems to support proper Linux networking since it's just a Linux VM under the hood.