From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: saschagrunert@icloud.com Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id b2c874c3 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:55:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from st11p00im-asmtp001.me.com (st11p00im-asmtp001.me.com [17.172.80.95]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 746264db for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:55:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from process-dkim-sign-daemon.st11p00im-asmtp001.me.com by st11p00im-asmtp001.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.38.0 64bit (built Feb 26 2016)) id <0OMR00500IVFER00@st11p00im-asmtp001.me.com> for wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:59:02 +0000 (GMT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_EDb1qcQa4/ohOwnoMfyQkw)" To: Vladimir Matveev From: Sascha Grunert Subject: Re: Rust implementation status Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:58:58 +0000 (GMT) Message-id: <80387df1-3237-43a0-adaa-09ffeebbef01@me.com> In-reply-to: <1489360183.27524.3.camel@gmail.com> Cc: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --Boundary_(ID_EDb1qcQa4/ohOwnoMfyQkw) Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Hello Vladimir,=0A=0AI just read that there is another WireGuard Rust impl= ementation here:=0Ahttps://github.com/sopium/titun/tree/wg=0A=0A1. Instead= of hand-rolling your own error management implementation,=0Aconsider usin= g the error-chain[1] crate. It seems that many popular=0Acrates now depend= on it[2]. It would make the Wireguard crate more=0Ainteroperable and more= readable for those who is already accustomed=0Awith error-chain. On the f= irst glance, your custom implementation=0Aresembles error-chain very much.= =0A=0AThis sounds great, I or we can go forward with that crate if it prov= ides=0Abetter error handling.=0A=C2=A0=0A2. Consider publishing the projec= t on some hosting service like Github=0Aor Gitlab or something else, which= would allow easier community=0Aparticipation. I would very much like to h= elp with its development, but=0AI never participated in any mailing-list b= ased projects and I=0Apersonally find it very inconvenient, and I think th= at the pull=0Arequests mechanics is greatly superior. Also, almost all Rus= t ecosystem=0Alives on Github, so lots of Rust developers are quite accust= omed to it,=0Aand you will most certainly attract more contributors that w= ay.=0A=0AI already thought about this but the project owner wants to have = a single=0Aplace where the sources lives. But mirroring code is possible a= s well,=0Alike we already do on github:=C2=A0https://github.com/WireGuard/= wireguard-rs=0A=C2=A0=0A3. On a related note, consider publishing a link t= o this project in the=0ARust community, in particular, in the Rust subredd= it[3] and maybe on=0AThe Rust Programming Language Forum[4]. I think that = many people there=0Awill be very interested in a project like this, becaus= e it is network-=0Arelated, it is pretty low level, and it will probably d= epend on the=0Acurrent "hot" crates in the Rust community, like tokio.=0A=0A= Yes this is a good idea and we can do that if we have a small working=0Apr= ototype. :)=0A=C2=A0=0A4. I think it would be quite idiomatic to split the= interface to WG=0Ainto a separate library crate, which the main binary wo= uld depend on.=0A=0AYeah sounds reasonable. Lets look forward to this.=0A=C2= =A0=0A5. I wonder, is it really necessary to perform daemonization manuall= y?=0AAs far as I understand the current situation in the daemon writing an= d=0Ainit systems, it is expected that daemons won't fork themselves and=0A= will continue working in foreground when started, while service=0Amanageme= nt systems like systemd or launchd will take care of keeping=0Athem alive,= collecting logs, starting, restarting, etc. Daemonizing=0Aalso seems quit= e unidiomatic on Windows. I also personally think that=0Aavoiding manual d= aemonization will make the code and architecture=0Asimpler and more manage= able.=0A=0AThe actual implementation follows strictly this guideline:=0Aht= tps://www.wireguard.io/xplatform/=0AUsually I agree in letting the daemon = stuff to systemd or something else,=0Abut we want to avoid fragmentation, = that different implementations behave=0Adifferently.=0A=C2=A0=0A6. Have yo= u decided which cryptographic libraries you are going to use?=0AOr are you= planning to implement the necessary primitives in this=0Aproject?=0A=0ANo= t now, there is no such decision done yet.=0A=0AI am looking really furthe= r for your contribution, since it is currently a "one man show",=0Awhich i= s pretty though for me.=0A=0AI know that a main development on GitHub=C2=A0= would spread the project better into the=0Aopen source world. Maybe we nee= d to discuss this point at some time.=0A=0ABest regards,=0ASascha=0A=0AAm = 13. M=C3=A4rz 2017 um 00:10 schrieb Vladimir Matveev :=0A=0AHi, Sascha,=0A=0AI'm a Rust programmer, and I really like that t= here is now a Rust=0Aimplementation of the Wireguard daemon!=0A=0AI have a= few question and suggestions.=0A=0A1. Instead of hand-rolling your own er= ror management implementation,=0Aconsider using the error-chain[1] crate. = It seems that many popular=0Acrates now depend on it[2]. It would make the= Wireguard crate more=0Ainteroperable and more readable for those who is a= lready accustomed=0Awith error-chain. On the first glance, your custom imp= lementation=0Aresembles error-chain very much.=0A=0A2. Consider publishing= the project on some hosting service like Github=0Aor Gitlab or something = else, which would allow easier community=0Aparticipation. I would very muc= h like to help with its development, but=0AI never participated in any mai= ling-list based projects and I=0Apersonally find it very inconvenient, and= I think that the pull=0Arequests mechanics is greatly superior. Also, alm= ost all Rust ecosystem=0Alives on Github, so lots of Rust developers are q= uite accustomed to it,=0Aand you will most certainly attract more contribu= tors that way.=0A=0A3. On a related note, consider publishing a link to th= is project in the=0ARust community, in particular, in the Rust subreddit[3= ] and maybe on=0AThe Rust Programming Language Forum[4]. I think that many= people there=0Awill be very interested in a project like this, because it= is network-=0Arelated, it is pretty low level, and it will probably depen= d on the=0Acurrent "hot" crates in the Rust community, like tokio.=0A=0A4.= I think it would be quite idiomatic to split the interface to WG=0Ainto a= separate library crate, which the main binary would depend on.=0A=0A5. I = wonder, is it really necessary to perform daemonization manually?=0AAs far= as I understand the current situation in the daemon writing and=0Ainit sy= stems, it is expected that daemons won't fork themselves and=0Awill contin= ue working in foreground when started, while service=0Amanagement systems = like systemd or launchd will take care of keeping=0Athem alive, collecting= logs, starting, restarting, etc. Daemonizing=0Aalso seems quite unidiomat= ic on Windows. I also personally think that=0Aavoiding manual daemonizatio= n will make the code and architecture=0Asimpler and more manageable.=0A=0A= 6. Have you decided which cryptographic libraries you are going to use?=0A= Or are you planning to implement the necessary primitives in this=0Aprojec= t?=0A=0AI'm really looking forward to the further development of this proj= ect,=0Aand I'm willing to participate in it if you're looking for=0Acontri= butors.=0A=0ABest regards,=0AVladimir=0A=0A[1]: https://crates.io/crates/e= rror-chain=0A[2]: https://crates.io/crates/error-chain/reverse_dependencie= s=0A[3]: https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/=0A[4]: https://users.rust-lang.org= /=0A_______________________________________________=0AWireGuard mailing li= st=0AWireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com=0Ahttps://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/= wireguard=0A= --Boundary_(ID_EDb1qcQa4/ohOwnoMfyQkw) Content-type: multipart/related; boundary="Boundary_(ID_gdCncjsWvRPvfugUl4uMzA)"; type="text/html" --Boundary_(ID_gdCncjsWvRPvfugUl4uMzA) Content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Vladimir,

I just = read that there is another WireGuard Rust implementation here:
<= meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dutf-8">https://github.com/sopium/titun/tre= e/wg

2. Consi= der publishing the project on some hosting service like Github
or Gitla= b or something else, which would allow easier community
participation. = I would very much like to help with its development, but
I never partic= ipated in any mailing-list based projects and I
personally find it very= inconvenient, and I think that the pull
requests mechanics is greatly = superior. Also, almost all Rust ecosystem
lives on Github, so lots of R= ust developers are quite accustomed to it,
and you will most certainly = attract more contributors that way.
<= div>
I already thoug= ht about this but the project owner wants to have a single
place where the sources lives. But mirroring code is possible as w= ell,
like we already do on github: https://github.com/WireGuard/wi= reguard-rs
 
= 3. On a related note, consider publishin= g a link to this project in the
Rust community, in particular, in the R= ust subreddit[3] and maybe on
The Rust Programming Language Forum[4]. I= think that many people there
will be very interested in a project like= this, because it is network-
related, it is pretty low level, and it w= ill probably depend on the
current "hot" crates in the Rust community, = like tokio.

Yes this is a good idea and we can do t= hat if we have a small working
prototype. :)=
 
4. I think it would be quite idiomatic to split the interface= to WG
into a separate library crate, which the main binary would depen= d on.

Yeah sounds reasonable. Lets look forward to t= his.
 
5. I wonder, is it really necessary to perform daem= onization manually?
As far as I understand the current situation in the= daemon writing and
init systems, it is expected that daemons won't for= k themselves and
will continue working in foreground when started, whil= e service
management systems like systemd or launchd will take care of = keeping
them alive, collecting logs, starting, restarting, etc. Daemoni= zing
also seems quite unidiomatic on Windows. I also personally think t= hat
avoiding manual daemonization will make the code and architecturesimpler and more manageable.
<= span>
The actual implement= ation follows strictly this guideline:
https://www.wireguard.io/xplatform/
Usually I agree in letting the daemon stuff to systemd or something = else,
but we want to avoid fragmentation, that different impleme= ntations behave
differently.
 
6. Have you decided whi= ch cryptographic libraries you are going to use?
Or are you planning to= implement the necessary primitives in this
project?
=

<= span>Not now, there is no such decision done yet.
<= br data-mce-bogus=3D"1">
I am looking really furthe= r for your contribution, since it is currently a "one man show",
which is pretty though for me.

I know that a main development = on GitHub would spread the project better into the
<= span>open source world. Maybe we need to discuss this point at some time.<= /span>

Be= st regards,
Sascha

Am 13. M=C3= =A4rz 2017 um 00:10 schrieb Vladimir Matveev <dpx.infinity@gmail.com>= ;:

Hi, Sascha,
I'm a Rust programmer, and I really like that there is now a Rust
impl= ementation of the Wireguard daemon!

I have a few question and sugge= stions.

1. Instead of hand-rolling your own error management implem= entation,
consider using the error-chain[1] crate. It seems that many p= opular
crates now depend on it[2]. It would make the Wireguard crate mo= re
interoperable and more readable for those who is already accustomed<= br>with error-chain. On the first glance, your custom implementation
re= sembles error-chain very much.

2. Consider publishing the project o= n some hosting service like Github
or Gitlab or something else, which w= ould allow easier community
participation. I would very much like to he= lp with its development, but
I never participated in any mailing-list b= ased projects and I
personally find it very inconvenient, and I think t= hat the pull
requests mechanics is greatly superior. Also, almost all R= ust ecosystem
lives on Github, so lots of Rust developers are quite acc= ustomed to it,
and you will most certainly attract more contributors th= at way.

3. On a related note, consider publishing a link to this pr= oject in the
Rust community, in particular, in the Rust subreddit[3] an= d maybe on
The Rust Programming Language Forum[4]. I think that many pe= ople there
will be very interested in a project like this, because it i= s network-
related, it is pretty low level, and it will probably depend= on the
current "hot" crates in the Rust community, like tokio.

= 4. I think it would be quite idiomatic to split the interface to WG
int= o a separate library crate, which the main binary would depend on.

= 5. I wonder, is it really necessary to perform daemonization manually?
= As far as I understand the current situation in the daemon writing and
= init systems, it is expected that daemons won't fork themselves and
wil= l continue working in foreground when started, while service
management= systems like systemd or launchd will take care of keeping
them alive, = collecting logs, starting, restarting, etc. Daemonizing
also seems quit= e unidiomatic on Windows. I also personally think that
avoiding manual = daemonization will make the code and architecture
simpler and more mana= geable.

6. Have you decided which cryptographic libraries you are g= oing to use?
Or are you planning to implement the necessary primitives = in this
project?

I'm really looking forward to the further devel= opment of this project,
and I'm willing to participate in it if you're = looking for
contributors.

Best regards,
Vladimir

[1]:= https://crates.io/crates/error-chain [2]: https://crates.io/crates/error-chain/reverse_dependencies
[3]= : https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/
[4]: https://users.rust-lang.org/
__________________________________= _____________
WireGuard mailing list
WireGuard= @lists.zx2c4.com
https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard
<= /div>
= --Boundary_(ID_gdCncjsWvRPvfugUl4uMzA)-- --Boundary_(ID_EDb1qcQa4/ohOwnoMfyQkw)--