On Mon 2017-07-10 21:53:57 +0200, Egbert Verhage wrote:
> Hey Baptiste,
>
> Jep, I did that.
> See the ifupdown package of my own wireguard ppa:
>
> https://launchpad.net/~eggiecode/+archive/ubuntu/wireguard
>
> And here is the diff:
> http://test.egbert.online/diff_ifupdown_ppa.txt

thanks for these pointers, Egbert!

i have a few questions about the proposed modification for ifupdown:

 * do we really want this to be a new interface type instead of
   extending the capabilities of some other configuration type?

 * if we can't just extend an existing type, wireguard seems more
   analogous to the "tunnel" type than to the "static" type, which is
   what this seems to have evolved from.

 * it looks to me like configuring a wireguard link this way will
   require an entry in /etc/network/interfaces (or interfaces.d) *and* a
   config file in /etc/wireguard/*.conf.  It seems like it would be
   cleaner to have all the configuration in one place, no?

 * would you consider submitting these changes to ifupdown in the debian
   BTS?  Is there a reason that they should remain in your PPA?

fwiw, some of us do also run debian systems without ifupdown these days.
I'm looking forward to systemd-networkd integration personally :)

        --dkg