From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: bruno@wolff.to Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 8070a696 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 17:29:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wolff.to (wolff.to [98.103.208.27]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with SMTP id 707c30bb for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 17:29:15 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 11:33:54 -0600 From: Bruno Wolff III To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Subject: Re: Should I expect faster recovery after one side goes down Message-ID: <20171127173354.GA17685@wolff.to> References: <20171127094931.GA3104@wolff.to> <20171127134914.GA9392@wolff.to> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed In-Reply-To: <20171127134914.GA9392@wolff.to> Cc: WireGuard mailing list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 07:49:14 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote: >On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:04:06 +0100, > "Jason A. Donenfeld" wrote: >>Hi Bruno, >> >>The first question is - how long? This might be related to the amount or type of traffic backed up. The two machines where this was very noticeable in testing had all of their traffic routed through the tunnel other than the encapsulating packets. (DNS traffic gets tunnelled.) Playing with this on my work machine where only traffic destined for a few specific hosts was tunnelled, I am finding it hard to duplicate the problem.