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 Received: from lists.zx2c4.com (lists.zx2c4.com [165.227.139.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DB5FC2BA1A for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 15:19:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lists.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 7cd49cfd; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 15:19:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.servers.dxld.at (mail.servers.dxld.at [2001:678:4d8::1a57]) by lists.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTPS id 361cc658 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO) for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 15:19:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: mail.servers.dxld.at; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 17:18:59 +0200 Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 17:18:53 +0200 From: Daniel =?utf-8?Q?Gr=C3=B6ber?= To: Stephan von Krawczynski , Diyaa Alkanakre Cc: Nico Schottelius , WireGuard mailing list Subject: Re: Wireguard uses incorrect interface - routing issue Message-ID: <20240621151853.s7nzoyanrn4sr6gf@House.clients.dxld.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240621155439.6cb5abb9@ithnet.com> X-BeenThere: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30rc1 Precedence: list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: wireguard-bounces@lists.zx2c4.com Sender: "WireGuard" Hi, On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 03:54:39PM +0200, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote: > ... and in case you do find someone interested at all there is still the > problem of no signaling to anyone when a client connects. > I hardly can remember the decade when all this was implemented in cipe. Yeah. Can be hard to get attention on netdev, but I've been advised that when the maintainance of a (sub)subsystem is in question that is an issue they'll take notice of. So be sure to lament the fact that Jason hasn't been responding in at least a year on this ML ;) IIRC we have a patch for netlink notifications on handshakes flying around somewhere tho. Just needs some more work. On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 04:42:02PM +0200, Diyaa Alkanakre wrote: > The better approach would be to exclude the IPs from your WireGuard > AllowedIPs. I always exclude IPs if I can before doing policy based > routing. > > https://www.procustodibus.com/blog/2021/03/wireguard-allowedips-calculator/ Interesting approach, thanks for the pointer :) --Daniel