Request: Optional "Comment" [Peer] entry
manuel.schoelling at gmx.de
Fri Nov 17 09:20:34 CET 2017
I like the idea of comments!
And while we're at it: having multiple [Peer] section in incompatible
with most other config parsing tools (e.g. python std library's
Maybe we could allow the peer section names to be of the form "Peer[A-
Za-z0-9\-]*" or something?
You could also use it for naming peers, i.e. using "Peer-(?P<name>[A-
On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 14:31 -0600, Lonnie Abelbeck wrote:
> I have a suggestion, feature request ...
> With several peers, the output of "wg show" is difficult to visually
> identify the peers at a quick glance.
> How about an optional "Comment = " entry for the [Peer] section.
> For Example:
> PublicKey = UMJMPFVTzjmzr7SJMQ7k+Z+3Pr1aq4w+5chtUny6Akg=
> Endpoint = [fda6:66b2:b74a:50::3]:51820
> AllowedIPs = 10.4.0.2/32
> Comment = pbx3 - Jetway NF9HG-2930
> For each peer in "wg show" with a "Comment = " defined ...
> peer: HIgo9xNzJMWLKASShiTqIybxZ0U3wGLiUeJ1PKf8ykw=
> endpoint: [fda6:662b:b74a:50::3]:51820
> allowed ips: 10.4.0.2/32
> latest handshake: 3 seconds ago
> transfer: 376 B received, 680 B sent
> comment: pbx3 - Jetway NF9HG-2930
> If others like this idea, should the comment be displayed first,
> last, etc. ?
> Truncating the comment string to 64 characters would be fine. Or
> even 32 chars.
> Thoughts ?
> WireGuard mailing list
> WireGuard at lists.zx2c4.com
More information about the WireGuard