[feature request] To support "Wireguard over raw TCP"
matthias at urlichs.de
Tue Oct 2 08:40:21 CEST 2018
On 25.09.2018 18:29, Breus Blaauwendraad wrote:
> Could someone tell whether or not TCP would be a future additional
> option for WireGuard, and why (not)?
Which of the umpteen available/possible ways of encapsulating UDP
packets in TCP (and possibly obfuscating them in some way) would you
want Wireguard to natively implement?
The answer is simple: None of them. Bind to localhost, and use a
separate program for forwarding UDP packets.
Also: Any performance gain from supporting TCP natively (as opposed to
going through userspace) is easily dwarfed by the fact that congestion
control requires occasionally dropping packets – specifically, the
packets queued to the TCP socket. TCP cannot do that. Even more
complexity in the kernel? not likely.
-- Matthias Urlichs
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the WireGuard