From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A92E3C35671 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 14:52:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (krantz.zx2c4.com [192.95.5.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E67CE20637 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 14:52:45 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E67CE20637 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=romanrm.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wireguard-bounces@lists.zx2c4.com Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 3ea437f4; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 14:49:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id ea00a133 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 14:49:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from len.romanrm.net (len.romanrm.net [IPv6:2001:41d0:1:8b3b::1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 8368c1b5 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 14:49:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from natsu (natsu.40.romanrm.net [IPv6:fd39:aa:c499:6515:e99e:8f1b:cfc9:ccb8]) by len.romanrm.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 011A041E0E; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 14:52:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 19:52:25 +0500 From: Roman Mamedov To: Neal Becker Subject: Re: wireguard slow pings Message-ID: <20200223195225.6210b37f@natsu> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com X-BeenThere: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: wireguard-bounces@lists.zx2c4.com Sender: "WireGuard" On Sun, 16 Feb 2020 07:58:48 -0500 Neal Becker wrote: > I'm testing wireguard > wireguard-0.0.20191219-2.fc31.x86_64 > between a Fedora 31 client and server, comparing to openvpn. > > Openvpn is running between a linux client outside my lan and a server on my > router, which is running dd-wrt. > I'm pinging between that linux client and another linux client within my > lan. > > wireguard is running between the same linux client outside my lan and the > same other linux client within my lan. This > time router is simply forwarding packets via NAT. > > Openvpn ping times are much lower (about 10ms) and much lower variance than > wireguard. Wireguard pings > are all over the place. > > Packets coming in from the WAN are traversing some firewall that I don't > control, which may be affecting results. Openvpn > is config to use udp. > > Any ideas? Did you try using the same port for WG, as you use for OpenVPN (of course stopping OpenVPN for a while to try that)? It is possible that ISPs employ different priorities for particular UDP port ranges; Or they might do load-balancing across multiple links by src/dst/port/protocol, and your WG's combination of that randomly happens to go via some unlucky overloaded one. -- With respect, Roman _______________________________________________ WireGuard mailing list WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard