From: Steve Gilberd <steve@erayd.net>
To: Eric Dillmann <lists@jave.fr>
Cc: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com
Subject: Re: Alternative to UDP
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 22:15:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJQSx3ahtq40bO=Fa4qJz=3_q0FU6cfOh1nuYg_s0KuVwSaoJA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <28272814.1271279.1519071494156.JavaMail.zimbra@jave.fr>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1318 bytes --]
Hi,
This feels like a bad idea to me - switching to a dedicated protocol would
remove a small amount of overhead, but comes with a lot of downsides, which
in my opinion outweighs the minor benefit of removing some of the overhead.
I have a strong preference for the continued use of UDP, because a large
amount of consumer networking gear can't handle destination NAT for
anything that isn't UDP or TCP. And even wth gear that can, using a
separate IP protocol would limit clients relying on destination NAT to one
client machine per public IP.
Cheers,
Steve
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, 09:20 Eric Dillmann, <lists@jave.fr> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Today i discovered that OVH is limiting UDP rate to 6Mbit/s, i did a test
> by encapsulating wireguard in an ip/ip tunnel
> and got 90Mbit/S.
>
> Is there a way to make wireguard evolve to use it's own protocol number.
>
> That would prevent the overhead of wireguard over ipip/gre/vxlan ...
>
> Thanks,
> Regards,
> Eric
> _______________________________________________
> WireGuard mailing list
> WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
> https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard
>
--
Cheers,
*Steve Gilberd*
Erayd LTD *·* Consultant
*Phone: +64 4 974-4229 **·** Mob: +64 27 565-3237*
*PO Box 10019 The Terrace, Wellington 6143, NZ*
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2191 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-19 22:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-19 20:18 Eric Dillmann
2018-02-19 22:15 ` Steve Gilberd [this message]
2018-02-19 22:29 ` Philippe Langlois
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='CAJQSx3ahtq40bO=Fa4qJz=3_q0FU6cfOh1nuYg_s0KuVwSaoJA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=steve@erayd.net \
--cc=lists@jave.fr \
--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).