add/remove a peer
smntov at gmail.com
Mon Mar 26 21:48:22 CEST 2018
On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 20:46 +0200, Luis Ressel wrote:
> Low-level tools such as wg aren't the right place for the "automagic"
> features you're suggesting. wg should have simple, bugproof code and
> behave reliably and predictably so that it can serve as a solid
> foundation for all sorts of high-level scripts.
> Of course, this doesn't mean your suggested features would be useless
> -- they just don't belong into the same binary as the low-level stuff.
> Build a script to handle the boring IP assignments for you, and if you
> believe it might be useful to others, by all means publish it!
Agreed. I remember that I read in the docs that some of the WG's tools
are of higher level. So I thought that automatic IP assignment could
belong to them. Probably it was wg-quick, but `wg set ...` is seemingly
a low-level stuff. Now I see. Thank you!
More information about the WireGuard