From: Alex Giurgiu <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: architectural question regarding the use of wireguard
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2021 14:35:10 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55393D98-0B32-4F8F-948A-C7AA1B5BF096@giurgiu.io> (raw)
Dear wg list,
First of all, thank you for this wonderful piece of software!
I am working on a software project which manages Linux containers on one or multiple machines, and I would like to implement a networking model where a Wireguard interface is created for every application that runs on this platform. Each application will be identified by a wg key + an IPv6 address deterministically derived from that key (similarly to what yggdrasil does).
Do you think this approach makes sense and will it scale from wg's point of view for situations where there are thousands of applications and hundreds of users each having one or two devices, with a complex matrix of permissions between the users and the applications? The key mapping and synchronisation between users and apps seems straightforward to me but I can't figure out if using wg for this scenario makes sense.
reply other threads:[~2021-09-07 17:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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).