WG via systemd (dis)advantage?

WG via systemd (dis)advantage?

[ѽ҉ᶬḳ℠]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 673 bytes --]

Debian kernel 4.15.11
WG 0.0.20180420-1

Out of curiosity having WG configured/manged via systemd, which is 
working thus far as having the interface up and listening (also after 
rebooting the server).

Now I was looking to manipulate the network interface with some 
post-up/post-down which though does not seems applicable with systemd, 
like it would be when managed through networking.service.

Hence, wondering whether I miss something about systemd or whether it is 
rather a bit of a disadvantage to configure/manage WG through systemd as 
opposed to networking.service?
What is the benefit of systemd vs. networking.service WG management?






[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4174 bytes --]

Re: WG via systemd (dis)advantage?

[Toke Høiland-Jørgensen]

=D1=BD=D2=89=E1=B6=AC=E1=B8=B3=E2=84=A0 <vtol@gmx.net> writes:

> Debian kernel 4.15.11
> WG 0.0.20180420-1
>
> Out of curiosity having WG configured/manged via systemd, which is=20
> working thus far as having the interface up and listening (also after=20
> rebooting the server).
>
> Now I was looking to manipulate the network interface with some=20
> post-up/post-down which though does not seems applicable with systemd,=20
> like it would be when managed through networking.service.

You can't do one-line up/down scripts, but you could create a separate
service file and have it depend on the wg interface...

> Hence, wondering whether I miss something about systemd or whether it is=
=20
> rather a bit of a disadvantage to configure/manage WG through systemd as=
=20
> opposed to networking.service?
> What is the benefit of systemd vs. networking.service WG management?

If you're using systemd-networkd to configure the rest of your
networking, having wireguard configured the same way can be useful; and
systemd-networkd can manage dependencies between interfaces as well (to
a certain extent).

However, as you note, things like running arbitrary scripts is a bit
more of a hassle...

-Toke

Re: WG via systemd (dis)advantage?

[ѽ҉ᶬḳ℠]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 157 bytes --]

Thank you for the instant feedback/clarification. Switched back to 
handle WG through networking.services, which seems more flexible and 
convenient.



[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4174 bytes --]