From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: markus.woschank@gmail.com Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 632090d9 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 17:18:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ot0-f175.google.com (mail-ot0-f175.google.com [74.125.82.175]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id e2913ff3 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 17:18:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ot0-f175.google.com with SMTP id b49so2604593otj.5 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 09:23:21 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <593d6d3a-550e-a14d-4c1d-f7ee8e731d87@gmail.com> References: <593d6d3a-550e-a14d-4c1d-f7ee8e731d87@gmail.com> From: Markus Woschank Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 18:23:20 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Roaming Mischief To: Aaron Jones Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: WireGuard mailing list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > WireGuard is not a client-server architecture Did not claim otherwise. > by removing the endpoint, you are preventing this peer from initiating. Two peers forming a connection have the following properties/aspects: * at least one has a fixed IP/DNS entry and this is set in the configuration as endpoint in the other peer's configuration * if one peer is in roaming mode it makes no sense to specify it's endpoint in the other peers's configuration * if both peers have fixed addresses it makes sense to specify each other endpoint IPs in the configuration so the connection can be established from both sides at any time Please prove me wrong and supply an example where it makes sense to have a roaming peer's endpoint set, where the roaming peer _really_ roams (changes it's IP) and where on reboot/reset/whatsoever the originally set endpoint IP in the configuration magically makes any sense again. Markus