On 25.09.2018 18:29, Breus Blaauwendraad wrote:
> Could someone tell whether or not TCP would be a future additional
> option for WireGuard, and why (not)?

Which of the umpteen available/possible ways of encapsulating UDP
packets in TCP (and possibly obfuscating them in some way) would you
want Wireguard to natively implement?

The answer is simple: None of them. Bind to localhost, and use a
separate program for forwarding UDP packets.

Also: Any performance gain from supporting TCP natively (as opposed to
going through userspace) is easily dwarfed by the fact that congestion
control requires occasionally dropping packets – specifically, the
packets queued to the TCP socket. TCP cannot do that. Even more
complexity in the kernel? not likely.

-- 
-- Matthias Urlichs