From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Tue Feb 18 15:33:21 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3668723D4C4 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 15:33:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kmacybsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lj1-f196.google.com (mail-lj1-f196.google.com [209.85.208.196]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48MPy82Dp1z47xk for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 15:33:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kmacybsd@gmail.com) Received: by mail-lj1-f196.google.com with SMTP id q23so7376241ljm.4 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:33:20 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=DV57+qZzEIHJhoy9QGzC42Hog5fiQOSiQRhdfZqHenM=; b=I34x0Qg7pc3c70I3u341siuGep8XnwA1C//J0gTlznsKzZLzve8MSooitVY/2XKi5G Cw8grZJ9+SliDZuH/utQkZwaEKi12cC5d4/sS3jUHhJsIJ07iR2JHEoQZvmK6Eii6cfO vMzFPlvZD8kbxgy3M8xS2I2EjGf4FEbq2kXAlg2GCUFFLR3/ahkGPzxdBdaL9K45cURD yZFQf+dszg2mW6ol3poT9OtIGmyyiXoJjCUJuGqAj5Fqgtjw6n1joN/4q6crXliBu4tS bREdw49JBYk9+Xp6MZFxy2HRbqkViC88h9njT+picxv9DNeB/OM8Oc/S8yTnnJD6R1M3 fx4g== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUBTJgg6N7vLReZe5RQ1j5crZddB5elcFMVW78HBkfpmuyaM7Qe ItE54Wm4b0sYzasWDsGOQMYxvkugPr0XIblZRG2ta++6 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxF89Ish3pOwNatqtO7r8NStimbbsJG61ysl1EshD5u1FAUjUOiYQqIZILPxsrpF/n0CVUjXkX7KQvleXFBreA= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8e70:: with SMTP id t16mr13377706ljk.73.1582039997601; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:33:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: "K. Macy" Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:33:06 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: wireguard implementation in progress with zero coordination or communication with wireguard project? can we help? To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" , "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 48MPy82Dp1z47xk X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of kmacybsd@gmail.com designates 209.85.208.196 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kmacybsd@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.90 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; URI_COUNT_ODD(1.00)[3]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[196.208.85.209.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.998,0]; IP_SCORE(-0.91)[ip: (0.19), ipnet: 209.85.128.0/17(-3.00), asn: 15169(-1.68), country: US(-0.05)]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[kmacy@freebsd.org,kmacybsd@gmail.com]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[196.208.85.209.rep.mailspike.net : 127.0.0.17]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[kmacy@freebsd.org,kmacybsd@gmail.com]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 15:33:21 -0000 Hi Jason - I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I can=E2=80=99t count the number of nasce= nt kernel projects that have come up in discussion over the years and ultimately come to nothing. I started by getting the OpenBSD bits to build on FreeBSD. However, the implementation in Open is not really a very good semantic match for FreeBSD. So I often have to check what the Linux one is doing as well and sometimes the NetBSD one. Ultimately, apart from struct definitions, very little code will be shared between the platforms. I don=E2=80=99t see a who= le lot of benefit to coordination until I can configure a Wireguard interface and there is at least the possibility of passing packets. At that point, presumably in the next month or so, I would very much welcome any time you can spare to audit and provide feedback. Cheers. On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 06:32 Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Hi Matthew, > > I'm Jason, the lead of the WireGuard project. > > Somebody brought it to my attention that Netgate has been sponsoring > you to write a WireGuard kernel implementation for FreeBSD. What a > terrific development! > > However, this is in fact the first I've heard of such an initiative, > which is quite surprising and possibly alarming. While I can sort of > vaguely imagine possible commercial reasons for this from Netgate's > perspective, I can't imagine that dis-coordination is something > desirable on the part of FreeBSD. I'd like to find some way we can > work together on this. > > In parallel, the WireGuard project has been working on an > implementation for OpenBSD's kernel that we intended to eventually > port to FreeBSD. We're also working on other implementations for other > platforms as well. It will be interesting to learn if your work is > "from scratch", or if you've already begun porting the in-progress > OpenBSD work. > > Our goal as a Project is to keep things as uniform and inter-operable > as possible, to offer the same good experience across platforms. > Another goal is to keep the security and security-related semantics > uniform. We view WireGuard as more than just the development of a > protocol, but rather as a set of implementations that we feel good > about. > > To that end, I was wondering if whatever development has been going on > for the FreeBSD kernel could begin to work with the WireGuard project. > Personally, I'd be interesting in auditing the code, reviewing the > design, matching up configuration semantics, and generally the set of > things we've done on each platform so far to make sure things going. > In other words, how can the WireGuard project get involved with this > great FreeBSD development? How can we begin to coordinate? > > Thanks, > Jason > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >