From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: rm@romanrm.net Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 46cdcca3 for ; Sun, 25 Mar 2018 19:30:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rin.romanrm.net (rin.romanrm.net [91.121.86.59]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 4e62cb01 for ; Sun, 25 Mar 2018 19:30:26 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 00:42:12 +0500 From: Roman Mamedov To: Kalin KOZHUHAROV Subject: Re: add/remove a peer Message-ID: <20180326004212.55bf62f0@natsu> In-Reply-To: References: <1521919967.1921.32.camel@gmail.com> <1522001437.2044.11.camel@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: WireGuard mailing list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 21:17:35 +0200 Kalin KOZHUHAROV wrote: > There is a reason, at least one, good one - it is called simplicity. > It is also hard to work when you are running out of disk space or > memory; do you expect WG to solve that for you? > Simply put, IP addressing schemes are not a part of WG, neither a requirement. > There are many ways to use WG and "assign random, free IP address and > send to a new peer" is too specific of a use case. > > May be you can cobble up something with a DHCP server that cares about > certain address range? > Or a simple flat-file dB and a script that does it for you? > > What happens when you run out of addresses? > How do you re-assign an IP address to a new peer? > ... > Those are questions widely outside WG, IMHO. Agreed. One more idea that comes to mind, is to use IPv6 and assign IPs based on peer public keys. Assuming a fixed /64 subnet, using a 64-bit half of the public key for the host part, still makes collisions nearly impossible. -- With respect, Roman