<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi Baptiste,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 11 Jan 2017, at 10:58, Baptiste Jonglez <<a href="mailto:baptiste@bitsofnetworks.org" class="">baptiste@bitsofnetworks.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">Hi Will,</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><br class=""><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">There have been backwards-incompatible changes recently: can you make sure</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">that you use the exact same wireguard version on all peers?</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>I was using the same version (Debian package 0.0.20161230-1 from Unstable). However my bug occured between the package version and the compiled version from 0.0.20170105 . So I'll retry with both same kernel modules. Because at least for that try, I have a mismatch. But for my previous experiments all the version were the same.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Additional question, is it better to use one interface with a big subnet and multiple remote peers or an interface by peer with a /30 or a /31 ? </div><div><br class=""></div><div>Cheers, </div><div><br class=""></div><div>Will</div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><blockquote type="cite" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class="">Any clue, ideas, else ?<br class=""><br class="">Cheers,<br class=""><br class="">Will<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">On 03 Jan 2017, at 09:52, Will van Gulik <<a href="mailto:mailing-porcus@porcus.ch" class="">mailing-porcus@porcus.ch</a>> wrote:<br class=""><br class="">Hi,<br class=""><br class="">I'm trying to use multiple wireguard tunnel in one VM at the same time, but it seems that only the first two I configured are working. I'm currently trying with 5 interfaces, I see the incoming packet in tcpdump but no reaction of the destination host with all the wg interfaces.<br class=""><br class="">I'm not sure there is a limitation on that, I could totally have missed that. Should I use 1 interface with multiple peers rather than multiple interface ?<br class=""><br class="">I'm testing that on a Debian with 4.8.7-1, running on a KVM host.<br class=""><br class="">Any insight ?<br class=""><br class="">Kind regards,<br class=""><br class="">Will<br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">WireGuard mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com" class="">WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com</a><br class="">https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">WireGuard mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com" class="">WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com</a><br class=""><a href="https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard" class="">https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard</a></blockquote></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>