3 ms·
It's a userland implementation. This is for the in-kernel implementation. It should be faster. Also, there are some comments that the userland version is rat
by jandrese 6y ago
It's a userland implementation. This is for the in-kernel implementation. It should be faster. Also, there are some comments that the userland version is rather hacky and probably should be transitioned away from once you can.
- JStanton617 6y agoOPNSense (the pfSense fork) is using the userland version. pfSense 2.5 is using this kernel code - https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/releases/2-5-0.html https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/releases/2-5-0.ht... "pfSense® Plus software version 21.02 and pfSense Community Edition (CE) software version 2.5.0 include a major OS version upgrade, a kernel WireGuard implementation..."
- pimeys 6y agoThe userland version is also from the original author of WireGuard and not that bad actually. I'm currently running it in an OPNsense box to serve our internet needs. I have a connection that without VPN can push through about 400-800 Mbps, and when I put the VPN on for all traffic, I can still push 400-800 Mbps through my connection. The in-kernel version can do the same with less CPU usage, and can probably drive multi-gigabit connections without any trouble.