From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: eric@ericlight.com Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 10712544 for ; Sat, 9 Dec 2017 01:02:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 01e85852 for ; Sat, 9 Dec 2017 01:02:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B53302093D for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 20:09:50 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1512781790.2178482.1199106832.50AF586D@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Eric Light To: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_----------=_151278179021784820" Subject: Re: [patch] add support for peer names using a file in userspace Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2017 14:09:50 +1300 References: <4B7E0154-039F-4008-9C47-C825E1474731@lonnie.abelbeck.com> <705B40D6-4947-4E5A-A042-B0C8A0D5BB84@lonnie.abelbeck.com> In-Reply-To: List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --_----------=_151278179021784820 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" For what it's worth, I agree with Lonnie that *something* is necessary. That said, I don't feel it makes sense in the context of [Peer- why_would_this_go_here_its_very_strange]. Having it as an attribute of the peer makes sense to me (e.g. "Description=")... the name really IS an attribute of a peer. The question is, is wg(8) the right place to put this? I think so, but only by virtue of the fact that I can't think of anywhere more appropriate to put it. Hope that feedback is worth at least two cents :) -------------------------------------------- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es On Sat, 9 Dec 2017, at 09:39, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > > On Dec 8, 2017 14:00, "Lonnie Abelbeck" > wrote:>> >> On Dec 8, 2017, at 12:45 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld >> wrote:>> >> I suggested "no spaces" since currently all spaces are stripped in >> config_read_line()> > Oh, okay. It's that way mostly out of my own laziness. I wouldn't > object to making that into a real parser though.> _________________________________________________ > WireGuard mailing list > WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com > https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard --_----------=_151278179021784820 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
For what it's worth, I agree with Lonnie that *something* is necessary.

That said, I don't feel it makes sense in the context of [Peer-why_would_this_go_here_its_very_strange].

Having it as an attribute of the peer makes sense to me (e.g. "Description=")... the name really IS an attribute of a peer.

The question is, is wg(8) the right place to put this?  I think so, but only by virtue of the fact that I can't think of anywhere more appropriate to put it.

Hope that feedback is worth at least two cents  :)

--------------------------------------------
Q: Why is this email five sentences or less?
A: http://five.sentenc.es



On Sat, 9 Dec 2017, at 09:39, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:


On Dec 8, 2017 14:00, "Lonnie Abelbeck" <lists@lonnie.abelbeck.com> wrote:

On Dec 8, 2017, at 12:45 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:

I suggested "no spaces"  since currently all spaces are stripped in config_read_line()

Oh, okay. It's that way mostly out of my own laziness. I wouldn't object to making that into a real parser though.
_______________________________________________
WireGuard mailing list

--_----------=_151278179021784820--