4 ms·
If you have an edge device which implements hardware IPsec at 10g+ but pushes WireGuard to software on an underpowered cpu then sure.
by hdgvhicv 10mo ago
If you have an edge device which implements hardware IPsec at 10g+ but pushes WireGuard to software on an underpowered cpu then sure.
- rebewhd 10mo agoWhile that's true, I'm not sure it's because of something inherent in IPsec vs WireGuard. It's more likely due to the fact that hardware accelerators have been designed to offload encryption routines that IPsec uses. One wonders what WG perf would look like if it could leverage the same hardware offload.
- iscoelho 10mo agoExactly this. I would love to see a commercial product with a hardware implementation for WireGuard, but it does not yet exist. IPsec, however, is well supported.
- kosolam 10mo agoThanks for your answers. I wonder though, from the perspective of a small user that doesn’t have requirements for such bandwidth, how does ipsec compare with wg on other metrics/features? Is it worth looking into?
- iscoelho 10mo agoI'd use WireGuard in that case. The main reason WireGuard is popular at all is because it is approachable. IPsec is much more complicated and is designed for network engineers, not users.
- kosolam 10mo agoWell yeah, so except being more complex and having hardware support, is there anything useful in ipsec? I meant a user in the general sense, not necessarily meaning a clueless non technical home user.