Re: [Babel-users] [RFC] Replace WireGuard AllowedIPs with IP route attribute

["Daniel Gröber" <dxld@darkboxed.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1157 bytes --]

Hi Alexander,

On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 12:57:26PM +0100, Alexander Zubkov wrote:
> I heard recently about the lightweight tunnel infrastructure in Linux
> kernel (ip route ... encap ...). And I think this might be helpful in
> the context of this thread.

I hadn't seen that yet, thanks for pointing it out.

> Linux kernel allows already to add encapsulation parameters to the route
> entry in its table. So you do not need to create tunnel devices for
> that. And wireguard encapsulation and destination might be added there
> too.

Right, I think ultimately it's going to come down to either technical
constraints or in the absence of that, maintainer preference whether
via-wgpeer or "encap wg" is the way. The idea is very similar anyway.

> But as I understood the technology, it works only in one way (for
> outgoing packets) and the decapsulation should be processed separately,
> for example in case of VXLAN and MPLS they have their own tables.

That would be a problem as I specifically want to tie the source address
filtering to this too. I'll have a look at the internals (if and) when I
get around to starting work on this.

Thanks,
--Daniel

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]