From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org  Tue May 22 01:44:30 2018
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69063EAF52B
 for <freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Tue, 22 May 2018 01:44:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Jason@zx2c4.com)
Received: from frisell.zx2c4.com (frisell.zx2c4.com [192.95.5.64])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "frisell.zx2c4.com", Issuer "frisell.zx2c4.com" (not verified))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11DD87B303
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Tue, 22 May 2018 01:44:29 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from Jason@zx2c4.com)
Received: by frisell.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id cf96d51a
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>;
 Tue, 22 May 2018 01:42:12 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=zx2c4.com; h=mime-version
 :in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc
 :content-type; s=mail; bh=BQphiVJFsqfgExC4HR3qJogB7AI=; b=Jz+QVc
 T1tDCJl4PN7Ex0MfaQhu/nQs1Qy86J567/epzaCK3NgdzU46mDF1UPs7fj/TA525
 +o8NwcidmIEeLbGYgXTpwh16cccIbeNjM5Lu5p6hgpFKk3WTczA7dy2fCzONVuvD
 nc/jX+ER8Ptl4Ey6tQH5C9RZ8JcWDHoh5GU1DIrQLU6jtwwYmvM3bZpV7wFJ/O/p
 0vqe6zbx5znSHkNpTskRo0HnVfq3tSFOIVO5o3KLGgO2Ew+6M5duXFFUv9OyHpfw
 cdUvXmOafe461gS/Fb18xsDnIk9Q1C2EvyOUZ6JTLw/g/hkRWjrPNF0UKuFd4sFQ
 y5Sa175OCUhushXw==
Received: by frisell.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTPSA id 7ccfdf94
 (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128:NO)
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>;
 Tue, 22 May 2018 01:42:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ot0-f174.google.com with SMTP id h8-v6so19103111otb.2
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 21 May 2018 18:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwf+rYFE1KYe1XuVNwoZGqSZqI/Dfgi8w7+aRdgLN3T30fxx5vLt
 TKpqkxjExWksIR3bL46fhnPGXnNum2NAOeZIgFU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZo2Q6rRcDg+iCVBjBVSR0eF1uUoKDYFMGXjeAyfsxPlPHM9mJkDahvKNRKxx5ArVfoPRbaF0zyGRl2uKWhZshQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:102b:: with SMTP id
 h40-v6mr16063284ote.41.1526953467398; 
 Mon, 21 May 2018 18:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.74.198.6 with HTTP; Mon, 21 May 2018 18:44:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKYr3zzm6E_KNXA3acW7QcJWHh1gw3+Laxh2fN+AS3E0LPn0gg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHmME9rJonVbSRHCPy0W7Pr=vmJoMbVTHbGw0C1xwBze4Px7uA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKYr3zzm6E_KNXA3acW7QcJWHh1gw3+Laxh2fN+AS3E0LPn0gg@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 03:44:26 +0200
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAHmME9q7Bcigcn5-sEK3=pnuyfDbxxc=HKg4qBCNe_Mj+cLjfg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHmME9q7Bcigcn5-sEK3=pnuyfDbxxc=HKg4qBCNe_Mj+cLjfg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: WireGuard for FreeBSD
To: Outback Dingo <outbackdingo@gmail.com>
Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Brady OBrien <brady.obrien128@gmail.com>, 
 WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 01:44:30 -0000

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 2:33 AM, Outback Dingo <outbackdingo@gmail.com> wrote:
> to be honest, while it sounds nice, i for one would prefer to see a
> kernel module ported to FreeBSD instead of userland
> second to that, building a freebsd port of it is not all that hard,
> however that being said, it also needs to be accepted
> upstream and committed by a ports maintainer, while i can help with
> creating it, i still feel a kernel module is a better fit

I too would prefer this, and maybe at some point down the line I'll
put some real time and effort into porting WireGuard from the Linux
kernel to kFreeBSD. But it's not the case that it's "not that hard";
doing so will be a pretty serious undertaking. That's going to take a
lot of time. Until that day arrives, what you speak of doesn't exist.
What we have instead today is tons of hard work that's gone into
bringing a userspace implementation.

So please, don't derail the current efforts in favor of an effort that
doesn't even exist at the moment.