wireguard.lists.zx2c4.com archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>
To: Henning Reich <henningreich@gmail.com>
Cc: WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>
Subject: Re: Overlapping AllowedIPs Configuration
Date: Sun, 12 May 2019 03:11:06 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190511171106.dvlribqe7ogdusrh@yavin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOAVeL3Vqr9GvomZFJafmTky-r_QmcymE0CB_ZpZHOiu=U_1aA@mail.gmail.com>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 952 bytes --]

On 2019-05-11, Henning Reich <henningreich@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, I think its correct behaviour.
> If you have overlapping networks  the more specific route is preferred.
> 10.10.10.0/24 overrule 10.10.0.0/16.
> If the subnets are the same, the last one is the more specific (because
> most recent one) and should be used.

But none of the AllowedIPs is "more specific" -- they're all /32.

In addition, the preferred one is the last one in the config file
(presumably because it gets configured last) even if you use more
specific route earlier in the config.

> And in germany, we say (literal translation): You're allowed to shoot
> yourself in the knee. (to be self-defeating) :-)

In English we say "shooting yourself in the foot" (hence a "foot-gun").
But I'd argue that you should avoid designing foot-guns when possible.

-- 
Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
<https://www.cyphar.com/>

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 148 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
WireGuard mailing list
WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard

  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-13  0:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-06 21:08 Overlapping AllowedIPs Configuration Aleksa Sarai
2019-05-11 15:19 ` Henning Reich
2019-05-11 17:11   ` Aleksa Sarai [this message]
2019-05-25 18:39 ` Paul Zillmann
2019-06-06 10:09   ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-06-07  8:05     ` Ivan Labáth
2019-06-07 10:07       ` Matthias Urlichs
2019-06-13  7:29         ` Vincent Wiemann
2019-06-07 23:58     ` Paul Zillmann
2019-06-08  7:32   ` Markus Grundmann

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=20190511171106.dvlribqe7ogdusrh@yavin \
    --to=cyphar@cyphar.com \
    --cc=henningreich@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).