From: Chris Osicki <wg@osk.ch>
To: WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>
Subject: Re: Continued use of `wg-quick save` and SaveConfig=true?
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2021 20:59:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210103195942.GA23975@server> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9oGiqbq1LtGtV=-wUu7K4OajdQO+6RiEZFw9jP73zpJ2Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Jan 02, 2021 at 03:37:09PM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was thinking recently that most people have switched from a model of
> updating the runtime configuration and then reading that back into a
> config file, to editing the config file and then syncing that with the
> runtime config. In other words, people have moved from doing:
>
> # wg set wg0 peer ... allowed-ips ...
> # wg-quick save wg0
>
> To doing:
>
> # vim /etc/wireguard/wg0.conf
> # wg syncconf wg0 <(wg-quick strip wg0)
>
> I think this is mostly a positive change too in terms of reliability.
> Reading back the runtime configuration was always a bit hit or miss,
> and I suspect that more times than not people have been confused by
> SaveConfig=true.
>
> That raises the question: are there good uses left for SaveConfig=true
> and `wg-quick save` that warrant keeping the feature around?
> Temporarily caching a roamed endpoint IP, perhaps, but how helpful is
> that?
>
> I haven't thought too deeply about this in order to be wedded to one
> outcome over the other yet, but seeing some confusion today, again, in
> #wireguard over the feature made me wonder.
>
> Any opinions on this? Any one on this list actively use this feature
> and see replacements for it (e.g. syncconf) as clearly inferior?
>
> Jason
Hi Jason
Being an old fashioned Unix admin, ~30 years spent in this job, I vote for the traditional way of doing it:
change the config file and let the application reread it.
I think the KISS principle is still valid ;-)
Thanks for the excellent software, Jason!
Regards,
Chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-04 12:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-02 14:37 Jason A. Donenfeld
2021-01-03 19:59 ` Chris Osicki [this message]
2021-01-04 16:16 ` Maarten de Vries
2021-01-04 18:41 ` Adrian Larsen
2021-01-04 21:05 ` Maarten de Vries
2021-01-05 0:16 ` Adrian Larsen
2021-01-08 10:42 ` Eicke Herbertz
2021-01-05 2:00 ` Michael B. Williams
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210103195942.GA23975@server \
--to=wg@osk.ch \
--cc=wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).