Should I expect faster recovery after one side goes down
baptiste at bitsofnetworks.org
Fri Dec 1 09:43:19 CET 2017
On 28-11-17, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 00:44:13 -0600,
> Bruno Wolff III <bruno at wolff.to> wrote:
> >I think the correct fix is to know if I reboot the router for testing
> >something, I need to also restart wireguard to make sure it is sending
> >data to the expected port. This isn't going to be an issue in normal
It sounds like one of these situations where persistent keepalives would
be useful, doesn't it?
This way the laptop would create a new binding in your firewall.
> I found a way to make it work more automatically. The reason the port was
> getting reassigned was because the original connection packet was being
> tracked and was conflicting with the source nat mapping even though in
> reallity the connection was the same. By putting in CT --notrack rules I was
> able to block that traking and without the conflict the port doesn't get
> remapped. I don't need tracking or the original connection for my firewall
> rules so this should be OK. On testing it seems to work as expected. Now
> when I reboot my router, my laptop reconnects and the wireguard tunnel works
> without having to restart it.
> WireGuard mailing list
> WireGuard at lists.zx2c4.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the WireGuard