From: Marc Fawzi <marc.fawzi@gmail.com>
To: Steven Honson <steven@honson.id.au>
Cc: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com
Subject: Re: RFC: wg syncpeers wg0 wireguard.conf
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 17:25:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACioZiuMHZRVxT+_aE9L3dDkn_fADrZCyC8MPgqZ_V5yECxNoQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16a64aa0-924c-4497-8252-cc965a04a740@www.fastmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1312 bytes --]
<<
I'm very much in favour of this (updating `setconf` to use this new
syncronisation approach), if anything it feels more logical and is how I
initially (wrongly) assumed `setconf` behaved when starting out with
WireGuard a while back.
>>
+1 ... it's better to keep the same command if its definition can be
expanded (fewer things to remember and less mental clutter)
p.s. does this overlap with similar planned in wg-dynamic?
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:23 PM Steven Honson <steven@honson.id.au> wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, at 3:56 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > The other thing I was wondering is: aside from performance and races
> > as described above, why not just make this the functionality of
> > `setconf`? Then there's be no need to introduce a new subcommand. In
> > otherwords, the idea would be to make `setconf` not destroy existing
> > peers if we're going to be re-adding them again.
>
> I'm very much in favour of this (updating `setconf` to use this new
> syncronisation approach), if anything it feels more logical and is how I
> initially (wrongly) assumed `setconf` behaved when starting out with
> WireGuard a while back.
> _______________________________________________
> WireGuard mailing list
> WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
> https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1930 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 148 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
WireGuard mailing list
WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-14 18:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-09 19:59 RFC: wg syncpeers wg0 wireguard.conf Lonnie Abelbeck
2019-06-10 12:34 ` Rene 'Renne' Bartsch, B.Sc. Informatics
2019-06-11 17:28 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-06-11 21:06 ` Lonnie Abelbeck
2019-06-11 21:41 ` Kalin KOZHUHAROV
2019-06-12 0:22 ` Steven Honson
2019-06-12 0:25 ` Marc Fawzi [this message]
2019-06-14 18:01 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-06-16 19:43 ` Marc Fawzi
2019-06-13 23:15 ` Lonnie Abelbeck
2019-06-14 18:09 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2019-06-14 20:48 ` Lonnie Abelbeck
2019-06-14 21:14 ` Ivan Labáth
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=CACioZiuMHZRVxT+_aE9L3dDkn_fADrZCyC8MPgqZ_V5yECxNoQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=marc.fawzi@gmail.com \
--cc=steven@honson.id.au \
--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).