From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FEC4C433DF for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 10:56:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (krantz.zx2c4.com [192.95.5.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9CC720706 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 10:56:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="n9xUE+J/" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D9CC720706 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wireguard-bounces@lists.zx2c4.com Received: by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id da628cbf; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 10:37:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lj1-x22f.google.com (mail-lj1-x22f.google.com [2a00:1450:4864:20::22f]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTPS id a3f91c3c (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO) for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 10:37:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-x22f.google.com with SMTP id 9so18764292ljc.8 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 03:56:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=JL+XV/BzqynQtvJjMI3V7r7YlotJKs4P3j08MF5bABk=; b=n9xUE+J/4I6tVfrAL6Mql/Y/98ubvtzUxbX/O7wtTmWFQ/ntZPe0facjjGoJGAOjlX 2j4Mph+tz0C/sJjsuGdw/4agF2rteAuJLIraBOTfaQ1Mij9sb7Oyn2fJcXKhr/4MY3+U usOWH8sj54kWuKFUbAasHP54fBIVLTXqKSpSpnwareqam91TKUXH2gZ44OZbhwkp0pxq IyA1ewWCJAqfye9LXvoSy47ZDhYKVHdyUykqLW5uYvnaNuM0qT1yCBejZSLmAqsycgrR jBCMmPRlgrdwA6BXozK4OWexv7FrI8/a3w38XcmcqVoVVayLJsCueasuB++lpPglYDeR AN6A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JL+XV/BzqynQtvJjMI3V7r7YlotJKs4P3j08MF5bABk=; b=k7Re7PCib4bDaLysbXmNl02PUU9Vxa31TLbqcBz1KcBgisThFx40xfC6CPhexDvBwt n7YL3SGEMUwMeS3GmqIZOM1bIV7O8Rekz7P93htjcKS9uW4Y8j8qJ/TuXi586BOCoVJX aDUYO0qcIq61LdqoLXbz27bhLkAEARS4pLlKs36iKRD/t4fIBdjFmZ8KiwR9EIspukMm onX6VmGkthO+Kl95NkLynZSbdOjo9umxxmgxCeJ7h7mHtQuSm+NA2eAYMO35HcpTW3Yi 2O9uKR+tMZ50SCYyqkFliR5vWImQxrznl47B+QsfOm5ooNx2wzn6L2usdnTVPsQ2tmbQ hujg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533R+YM3HJ6hz6G3gcFwm6OSrTIRMj4yx0vkTDWp9J1bSVU8ngvq CIsbBgc9WN3ImzIb0qve+hZKVbAYl+hQxAL5GKM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyXvTXVzxuLI+cSJ9UGKF77Rrn0rXxjbPhotgG9UBR7E1NonbvNYZEyhVVCSPI5X2BOcaVr4/ngRvznX/PAIY0= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:7313:: with SMTP id o19mr8387803ljc.27.1592823393609; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 03:56:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Christopher Ng Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:56:22 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Wireguard over VPN broken on windows To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Cc: WireGuard mailing list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30rc1 Precedence: list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: wireguard-bounces@lists.zx2c4.com Sender: "WireGuard" it worked for me on a local build, it never worked in any released version. i've been playing around with a local build, if i comment out the device.BindSocketToInterface calls in defaulltroutemonitor.go, everything seems to work fine. in a single config i have one peer on an OpenVPN interface, and one on the default interface. both are connected, i can ping both peers over the wg interface. why must the socket be bound to a particular interface? or perhaps i don't understand what those calls do. On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 09:23, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > > 59e556f on wireguard-go breaks > > 59e556f fixes a regression, which never shipped in any release. There > is nothing here that "once worked and now doesn't." What you have in > mind has never worked. > > We're currently using IP_UNICAST_IF on the wireguard socket, attaching > it to the default route. I'd much rather have something like Linux's > policy routing and suppress_prefixlen, but I don't know how to do that > (yet?) on Windows. If you have any ideas or want to do some research, > I'd certainly be very interested.