wireguard.lists.zx2c4.com archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Glen Bojsza <gbojsza@gmail.com>
To: WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>
Subject: Re: Need for HW-clock independent timestamps
Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 20:05:48 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACW8NbC6PuGHminw-yrCaX5q5Zkbd7ftRset90sPvsT6r4KgVA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKXLc7capqT5oFinwT6Cj1-b2h5gKo+CG+WTLbFO+bG7pR7NsQ@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2410 bytes --]

Why not add a configurable  timer feature to wireguard where you can set
the amount of time after power up before the wireguard vpn comes up? This
would solve the problem universally and may be the simplest / quickest
solution.

Disclaimer: I don't have a developer's background only a user's one so I am
not sure how hard this technically would be to implement...maybe someone
can weigh in from the wireguard team.

Glen

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 6:46 PM Kalin KOZHUHAROV <me.kalin@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 12:07 AM, Axel Neumann <neumann@cgws.de> wrote:
> > We have the following chicken-egg problem:
> > We are using WG on openwrt devices which do not have a hardware clock so
> > that time is resetted after each reboot.
> > Because internet access shall be routed via WG tunnels the internet and
> > network-time services (NTP) is not available unless WG works properly.
> > But, guess, to reconnect, WG needs a greater time than before it
> > rebooted :-(
> >
> > I heard that a suggested solution is to periodically save the current
> > time to filesystem and then fix it during boot based on the last saved
> > one. But all embedded devices use flash memory with a limited amount
> > (about 10^5) of write cycles before they become unstable which would
> > destroy the flash within weeks.
> >
> Good/Hard problem!
>
> > Any ideas how to circumvent this problem?
> >
> I only see 2 ways:
> * hardware: add a cheap RTC (best), or storage (USB, SD)
> * policy: add exception for ntpdate on base UDP (not WG) (or have
> dedicated server/s for that, which you control).
>
> BTW, while flash write cycles are indeed limited, you are writing a
> very small data (that causes a single block to be rewritten).
> So a device with say 32 MB(8000 x 4K blocks) will last about 9000
> years if you write one block once per hour until 10% (=800) of its
> cells are past 10^5 writes.
> (or 3 years if you write once per second!)
> But my knowledge says 10^3-10^4 write cycles (so still 90-900 years for
> 1/hour).
>
> If you have a large number of devices of the same hardware, I'd
> suggest a "kill test" of one of them, by rewriting its flash. You can
> further use specific file-systems optimized for NAND/NOR flash.
>
> Cheers,
> Kalin.
> _______________________________________________
> WireGuard mailing list
> WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
> https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3165 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-12  0:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-11 22:07 WG: Need for HW-clock independent timestamps Axel Neumann
2018-05-11 22:45 ` Kalin KOZHUHAROV
2018-05-12  0:05   ` Glen Bojsza [this message]
2018-05-12 19:29   ` Axel Neumann
2018-05-12 19:41     ` Aaron Jones
2018-05-15 20:21       ` Devan Carpenter
2018-05-15 20:49         ` Kalin KOZHUHAROV
2018-05-16  7:10           ` Matthias Urlichs
2018-05-16 19:32           ` Axel Neumann
2018-05-16 20:32             ` Steve Gilberd
2018-05-17  3:40               ` Paul
2018-05-17  5:03                 ` Roman Mamedov
2018-05-17  5:53                   ` Matthias Urlichs
2018-05-17  7:07                     ` Axel Neumann
2018-05-17  8:28                       ` Matthias Urlichs
2018-05-16 20:35             ` Kalin KOZHUHAROV
2018-05-12 22:10     ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-05-12 23:05     ` Reuben Martin
2018-05-13  6:11     ` Matthias Urlichs
2018-05-13 12:37       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-05-16  7:01         ` Axel Neumann
2018-05-16  9:38           ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-05-16 11:08             ` Matthias Urlichs
2018-05-16 11:12             ` Axel Neumann
2018-05-13 14:21   ` Wang Jian
2018-05-21 10:07 ` WG: " Axel Neumann
2018-05-21 11:22   ` Reto Brunner
2018-05-21 11:52     ` Axel Neumann
2018-05-21 12:31       ` Axel Neumann
2018-05-21 12:35       ` Reto Brunner
2018-05-21 13:53         ` Matthias Urlichs
2018-05-21 14:56           ` Bruno Wolff III
2018-05-21 15:34             ` Matthias Urlichs
2018-05-22 20:25               ` Ivan Labáth
2018-05-23  2:51                 ` Matthias Urlichs
2019-02-04 14:56                 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-02-23  4:00                   ` Axel Neumann
2019-02-23 12:35                     ` Ivan Labáth
     [not found] <1324673763.992877.1526187430298.ref@mail.yahoo.com>
2018-05-13  4:57 ` reiner otto
2018-05-13 12:35   ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen

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=CACW8NbC6PuGHminw-yrCaX5q5Zkbd7ftRset90sPvsT6r4KgVA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=gbojsza@gmail.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).