Development discussion of WireGuard
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: nicolas prochazka <prochazka.nicolas@gmail.com>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Cc: WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>
Subject: Re: multiple wireguard interface and kworker ressources
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 20:08:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADdae-gdmjA+PArR+8G3Qy7DPakGqrRZv1E8pB9COhxuoSwhUg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9oZUT4BfGojkiEpX5+EXLGcyXNp7mz3mvHBVfPHiYospw@mail.gmail.com>

hello,
one interface = one public key
with multiples interfaces we can manage mutliples ip without aliasing,
it's more confortable to bind some specific service .
statisitiques informations ( bp, error) is more easily to manage with
differents interfaces

we are talking about ~ 1000 wireguard interfaces with 500 tunnels
(peer) for each .

Nicolas

2017-06-14 16:15 GMT+02:00 Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:50 PM, nicolas prochazka
> <prochazka.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> At this moment, we are using  3000 wg tunnel on a single wireguard
>> interface, but now
>> we want divide the tunnels by interface and by group of our client, to
>> manage qos by wireguard interface, and some other tasks.
>> So on in a single interface, it's working well, but test with 3000
>> interface causes some trouble about cpu / load average , performance
>> of vm.
>
> This seems like a bad idea. Everything will be much better if you
> continue to use one tunnel. If you want to do QoS or any other type of
> management, you can safely do this per-IP, since the allowed IPs
> concept gives strong binding between public key and IP address.

  reply	other threads:[~2017-06-14 17:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-13 12:38 nicolas prochazka
2017-06-13 12:48 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2017-06-13 14:55   ` nicolas prochazka
2017-06-13 21:47     ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2017-06-14  7:52       ` nicolas prochazka
2017-06-14 13:50         ` nicolas prochazka
2017-06-14 14:15           ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2017-06-14 18:08             ` nicolas prochazka [this message]
2017-06-21 13:54               ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2017-06-14 14:05         ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2017-06-14 14:13           ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2017-06-14 14:17             ` nicolas prochazka

Reply instructions:

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:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CADdae-gdmjA+PArR+8G3Qy7DPakGqrRZv1E8pB9COhxuoSwhUg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=prochazka.nicolas@gmail.com \
    --cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
    --cc=wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* 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).