From: "Jason E. Aten" <j.e.aten@gmail.com>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>
Subject: Re: nat traversal / userspace impl
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2017 16:28:47 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPNEFAZZziFPm7mDxBA8WDYROBaBP-fv8RsYjGtTLDDd46+0Xw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9qQmaQXBJ+pR6MHx90fUb0_EmwriBo6=rRupEDFF6d=Yg@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1184 bytes --]
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Jason E. Aten <j.e.aten@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 1. If it uses UDP only, how does NAT traversal (firewall punch through)
> > work?
>
> The same way UDP punching works every place else.
>
Thanks, Jason, for the quick reply.
If I read through the wikipedia article on UDP hole punching, it (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UDP_hole_punching) suggests that a public 3rd
party is needed.
> S is a public server with a well-known, globally reachable IP address.
...which makes total sense. Conversely, I don't see described anywhere a
public 3rd party protocol for wireguard clients to rendezvous.
I found this post:
https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/wireguard/2016-August/000372.html, which
makes rendezvous seem like an after thought.
Should I conclude that addressing NAT-ed clients is not something that
WireGuard itself plans to address?
The "number of security problems" with the approach mentioned in passing in
the 2016-August message would need enumeration and addressing. Is anybody
thinking about those? Is this on the roadmap for future plans?
Regards,
Jason
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1871 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-17 21:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-17 17:45 Jason E. Aten
2017-04-17 17:55 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2017-04-17 21:28 ` Jason E. Aten [this message]
2017-04-17 21:30 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2017-04-17 21:36 ` Jason E. Aten
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=CAPNEFAZZziFPm7mDxBA8WDYROBaBP-fv8RsYjGtTLDDd46+0Xw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=j.e.aten@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).