From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: mail@danrl.com Received: from mx.sealand.io (mx.sealand.io [193.160.39.68]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 0a706287 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:40:15 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\)) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dan_L=C3=BCdtke?= In-Reply-To: <44DAF4D4-00A8-4903-8003-EB0215635B61@danrl.com> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 15:45:35 +0100 Message-Id: <45F20C6B-9E9C-44BE-B73B-555A094864D1@danrl.com> References: <44DAF4D4-00A8-4903-8003-EB0215635B61@danrl.com> To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Cc: WireGuard mailing list Subject: Re: [WireGuard] Demo Server: Dual stack? List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , PS: This is not urgent or anything. Just wanted to know what your plans = are and/or to get an idea how to setup a demo server myself. I think there are more important things to do right now. > On 16 Nov 2016, at 15:38, Dan L=C3=BCdtke wrote: >=20 > Hi Jason, >=20 >> I guess I could provide IPv6 connectivity, but.... why? It's a demo. >=20 > Because it is a demo of a brand new protocol, showing how it can be = used with legacy versions payload and transport protocol. I find that = odd, but as I understand we have contradicting point of views on IP = protocols. >=20 >> If you're using it as an access point to the Internet with intentions >> beyond simply trying out WireGuard, then you're abusing my service. >=20 > I am not using it at all. But it would be useful for howtos and blog = posts to reference it. I don't use vintage IP in my posts, so I can't = refer to the official demo server. >=20 > Since many potential peers are behind NATs using RFC1918 legacy IP = addresses AND have global unicast IP addresses (which are easier to = whitelist in a firewall than maintaining port forwarding in networks = using a dynamic configuration protocol) I expect WireGuard to be = especially useful using IPv6 as transport. >=20 > BTW, I don't see any reason why the demo server should forward to the = Internet at all. Connectivity between peers/server and accessing the = hidden website would be enough for my usecase (howtos/blog posts), which = may be a different one than what you intended when you setup the server.=20= >=20 >> I'm happy to consider this, but I'll need to be convinced that this >> actually matters. >=20 > Unfortunately :) I, for one, need to be convinced why I should create = lasting documentation using an EOL IP protocol. Why does IPv4 matter = more than IPv6? Usually, latency is better when using IPv6. Latency is = probably the first thing demo users test (ping through the tunnel). >=20 > However, if you like to share some information how to set up one = myself, I am happy to host a IPv6 demo server. Currently I am wondering = how to accept *any* public key in the [Peer] config. >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > Dan >=20 >> Jason >>=20 >> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Dan L=C3=BCdtke = wrote: >>> Jason, >>>=20 >>> do you plan on adding IPv6 compatibility to the demo server? If not, = do you mind if I set one up? How difficult is it to run the demo server. = It just accepts every key, right? >>>=20 >>> Cheers, >>>=20 >>> Dan >>> _______________________________________________ >>> WireGuard mailing list >>> WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com >>> http://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard >=20 > _______________________________________________ > WireGuard mailing list > WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com > http://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard