From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org  Fri May 25 10:17:19 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 609E3F7808D
 for <freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Fri, 25 May 2018 10:17:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from crest@rlwinm.de)
Received: from mail.rlwinm.de (mail.rlwinm.de [138.201.35.217])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E464F7B08E
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Fri, 25 May 2018 10:17:18 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from crest@rlwinm.de)
Received: from crest.bultmann.eu (unknown
 [IPv6:2a00:c380:c0d5:1:6cd7:2b5f:ca70:f4d6])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mail.rlwinm.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8FAE99A99;
 Fri, 25 May 2018 10:17:16 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: WireGuard for FreeBSD
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Cc: ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
References: <CAHmME9rJonVbSRHCPy0W7Pr=vmJoMbVTHbGw0C1xwBze4Px7uA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHmME9pnJqE0gaM_zPTwZ5i+Qb7nNeSw=P4+VhG3aMiUYGdJkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHmME9oNZrc5iQXwf8cpwdt+3hLR=3Tc4Or36Yt4dds=h8sSdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE-m3X2=7MDA9pz2Si-yQC1tCxS5Y9SGuv5uQ9ZXrVmYqU_-4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <b4e4686d-7510-699e-4386-153b655e1583@rlwinm.de>
 <CAHmME9rS5TJ8D=x3Q_bEkfeNLhYXsmW=d5iuRey8+rkwOsd8hQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jan Bramkamp <crest@rlwinm.de>
Message-ID: <3e0a569c-f3e6-39ad-51ec-9ca8659abc4e@rlwinm.de>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:17:16 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9rS5TJ8D=x3Q_bEkfeNLhYXsmW=d5iuRey8+rkwOsd8hQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:17:19 -0000

On 24.05.18 13:07, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:43 PM, Jan Bramkamp <crest@rlwinm.de> wrote:
>> Did I understand correctly that both these ports are userspace
>> implementations and have a similar per packet overhead to OpenVPN and fastd?
> 
> Indeed they're userspace ports. Maybe down the line this will be
> ported to the FreeBSD kernel like we have on Linux.
> However, performance wise, even the userspace implementation seems to
> have better performance than OpenVPN in my testing.

I tried wireguard-go on OpenBSD and FreeBSD. I want to use WireGuard as 
replacement for OpenVPN point to point tunnels with dynamic routing 
(OSPF, iBGP). Especially this requires the right interface flags for the 
tun interface. So far wireguard-go on *BSD configures the tun interfaces 
as multicast incapable, broadcast interface which confuses the OpenBSD 
OSPF daemon completely and doesn't make any sense for a point to point 
tunnel. I get that wireguard-go tries to fake point to multipoint 
support that way. Is there a better solution than changing the hardwired 
argument ioctl() in tun/tun_*bsd.go?