Re: How to optimize AllowedIPs "overlapping" routes?

[Johnny Utahh <mailman-wireguard.com@johnnyutahh.com>]

More discussion here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WireGuard/comments/12oimvq/how_to_optimize_allowedips_overlapping_routes/

Clearly this is FAQ-ish kind of thing. It was a little hard for me to 
easily find a reference for this kind of stuff. I realize the WireGuard 
project may not consider it to be their responsibility to address such 
things.

~J

On 2023-04-16 10:06 AM, Johnny Utahh wrote:
> 1. wg0.conf: AllowedIPs = 0.0.0.0/0, ::0/0 --> higher-latency network
> 2. wg1.conf: AllowedIPs = 192.168.7.0/24   --> much-lower-latency network
>
> When enabling both of the devices/.conf's (listed as 1. and 2. above) 
> concurrently, the #2 route travels over #1 (all starting up via 
> 'wg-quick'). In this scenario I'd prefer #2 routing "bypasses" #1 and 
> retain its (#2's) lower-latency path/network. Can this be done, somehow?
>
> I deduce the "route" for #2 changes when concurrently-enabling #1 
> because the #2-ping-latency immediately and dramatically increases to 
> match #1-network's latency (and immediately reverts to #2's lower 
> latency when #1 is disabled). This hurts my #2 network, badly.
>
> I'm running/testing the above on macOS v12.6.3 build 21G419, 
> wireguard-go v0.0.20230223. If not on macOS, might this be feasible on 
> Fedora or Ubuntu?
>
> I realize this might be a FAQ. I could not find any docs/resources to 
> help after a brief search, so I'm posting here.
>
> [I'm not a networking expert, so I may be butchering various 
> terminology, concepts. I apologize in advance for my ignorance.]
>
> ~J