From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: mail@danrl.com
Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id aff5cbba
 for <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>;
 Wed, 18 Jan 2017 06:01:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mx.cakelie.net (mx.cakelie.net [45.76.39.236])
 by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 182831e9
 for <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>;
 Wed, 18 Jan 2017 06:01:14 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Built-in Roaming is limited due to a design fault adding STUN and
 TURN support would be good and make wire-guard connections more durable.
From: =?utf-8?Q?Dan_L=C3=BCdtke?= <mail@danrl.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANA3KFWHVtdDTRPqrbOfqJmHU=oh=ZDHitHmjBRO=xv+LnjYJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 07:11:54 +0100
Message-Id: <1CF3351B-5760-45D6-9D54-4D0A4FC92036@danrl.com>
References: <CANA3KFU0THGCkVhCsEC4CMfoj394XetYZ_TebyFGTwYiDZ9cBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHmME9qS7ptMcCuvxcobi12hgfYdd4yYcOW5+D_uL6uOGq2f2A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANA3KFWZP9XmCyWNnb19ywGRa8q57OUNt=42G1yjqkvLYc1kPw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHmME9qG4KnuFOCVi6w8fUJ9DVDL9_XjZnWxWPQGQaaPz6UTQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANA3KFUyf6NP9hu5i0rWfaKq7a27NQhWg4z-LE2SnTHTrbKM9g@mail.gmail.com>
 <F343B5F3-4A99-4F0D-B5BE-DBDC0CDECE09@danrl.com>
 <CANA3KFWHVtdDTRPqrbOfqJmHU=oh=ZDHitHmjBRO=xv+LnjYJg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Dolding <oiaohm@gmail.com>
Cc: WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>
List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard <wireguard.lists.zx2c4.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/options/wireguard>,
 <mailto:wireguard-request@lists.zx2c4.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/wireguard/>
List-Post: <mailto:wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>
List-Help: <mailto:wireguard-request@lists.zx2c4.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard>,
 <mailto:wireguard-request@lists.zx2c4.com?subject=subscribe>

Two things I have not seen so far:
- government regulations that enforce NAT
- ISPs (let alone carriers) "upgrading" their networks to ipv6 nat (i myself=
 have run both, isp + carrier networks, and i call BS on your future outlook=
 regarding nat ipv6)
- code from you in this thread



> On 18 Jan 2017, at 06:55, Peter Dolding <oiaohm@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> government
> regulations stating nats be used