On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 01:07:40PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 27/05/20(Wed) 20:18, Matt Dunwoodie wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 May 2020 09:34:53 +0200
> > Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > Regarding the kernel, I'd suggest you use "#if NWG > 0" like it is
> > > done for other pseudo-drives with
On 27/05/20(Wed) 20:18, Matt Dunwoodie wrote:
> On Wed, 27 May 2020 09:34:53 +0200
> Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > Regarding the kernel, I'd suggest you use "#if NWG > 0" like it is
> > done for other pseudo-drives with 'needs-flag'.
>
> For the most part there is no significant changes to other
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 01:21:21AM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 1:19 AM Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > Of course.., I was running it from a !wxallowed mount. BTW, qemu is in
> > packages, no need to build it yourself.
>
> Sure, but now I've been somewhat nerd sniped and
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 1:19 AM Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> Of course.., I was running it from a !wxallowed mount. BTW, qemu is in
> packages, no need to build it yourself.
Sure, but now I've been somewhat nerd sniped and am playing with this
fcode forth implementation in qemu :-P. I wonder if
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 01:05:59AM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:15 AM Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:28:09PM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Otto,
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 4:07 AM Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > > >
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:15 AM Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:28:09PM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>
> > Hi Otto,
> >
> > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 4:07 AM Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > > Although I'm not terribly interested in bugs that are only seen (s0
> > > far) using
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:28:09PM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Hi Otto,
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 4:07 AM Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > Although I'm not terribly interested in bugs that are only seen (s0
> > far) using emulation, please send me the details on how you set up
> > qemu.
>
>
Hi Otto,
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 4:07 AM Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> Although I'm not terribly interested in bugs that are only seen (s0
> far) using emulation, please send me the details on how you set up
> qemu.
Right, it could very well be a TCG bug. But maybe not. Here's how to
get things
On Wed, 27 May 2020 01:43:34 -0600
"Jason A. Donenfeld" wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 1:34 AM Martin Pieuchot
> wrote:
> > First question is, is it possible to use the wg(4) interface
> > without a port?
>
> No, that is not how WireGuard works. For details on the actual
> protocol
On Wed, 27 May 2020 09:34:53 +0200
Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Hello Matt,
>
> Thank you for your submission.
Hi Martin,
No worries, thank you for your feedback. This is something I want to
help make happen and if I recall correctly, someone once said that if I
wanted a new feature on OpenBSD
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:14:29AM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> One interesting quirk in doing this on qemu is that the 6.7 and
> -current kernel both crash:
>
> Loading FCode image...
> Loaded 6882 bytes
> entry point is 0x4000
> Evaluating FCode...
> OpenBSD IEEE 1275 Bootblock 2.0
>
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 2:12 AM Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>
> Hi again Klemens,
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 5:42 PM Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 4:52 PM Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > > With regards to your crash, though, that's a bit more puzzling, and
> > > I'd be
Hey David,
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 2:26 AM David Gwynne wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 05:42:13PM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 4:52 PM Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > > With regards to your crash, though, that's a bit more puzzling, and
> > > I'd be interested
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 05:42:13PM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 4:52 PM Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > With regards to your crash, though, that's a bit more puzzling, and
> > I'd be interested to learn more details. Because these structs are
> > already naturally
Hi again Klemens,
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 5:42 PM Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 4:52 PM Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > With regards to your crash, though, that's a bit more puzzling, and
> > I'd be interested to learn more details. Because these structs are
> > already
On Tue, 26 May 2020 13:28:22 +0200
Tobias Heider wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> just repeating what I commented yesterday for the new diff to make
> sure it isn't overlooked.
Thank you for repeating it, I didn't get around to addressing it before
the new diff.
> > +int
> > +wg_ioctl_get(struct
Hi Martin,
To answer a few but not all of your questions:
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 1:34 AM Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> First question is, is it possible to use the wg(4) interface without a
> port?
No, that is not how WireGuard works. For details on the actual
protocol particulars, please see
Hello Matt,
Thank you for your submission.
On 26/05/20(Tue) 19:39, Matt Dunwoodie wrote:
> After some feedback and comments, we've addressed the concerns, and
> fixed a few things from our side too. Overall the structure is familiar
> with no major changes, so any prior readings mostly carry
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 4:52 PM Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> With regards to your crash, though, that's a bit more puzzling, and
> I'd be interested to learn more details. Because these structs are
> already naturally aligned, the __packed attribute, even with the odd
> nesting Matt had prior,
Hey Klemens, Theo,
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 2:38 PM Klemens Nanni wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 02:23:06PM -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > That's good news that it's working for you now, but I didn't change
> > anything within the last 24 hours (you mentioned "yesterday") that
> > would
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 2:33 PM Theo de Raadt wrote:
>
> Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>
> > Hey Klemens,
> >
> > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 9:13 AM Klemens Nanni wrote:
> > > I worked with the patches from the wireguard-openbsd repository after
> > > version one of this diff on tech@ became a bit
Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Hey Klemens,
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 9:13 AM Klemens Nanni wrote:
> > I worked with the patches from the wireguard-openbsd repository after
> > version one of this diff on tech@ became a bit old.
> >
> > That was until yesterday; the kernel would panic due to
Hey Klemens,
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 9:13 AM Klemens Nanni wrote:
> I worked with the patches from the wireguard-openbsd repository after
> version one of this diff on tech@ became a bit old.
>
> That was until yesterday; the kernel would panic due to memory
> alignment issues in various spots,
Hey Tobias,
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 5:28 AM Tobias Heider wrote:
> > + if (((SIZE_MAX - size) / sizeof(struct wg_aip_io)) < sc->sc_aip_num)
> > + goto error;
>
> I still think those two should return an error. 'goto error' is misleading as
> it doesn't actually set ret != 0.
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 08:09:48AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> I'll let you know who has sparc64 machines to help out:
>
> kn was the developer who saw the problem. jca is also adept
> enough to look at this with you.
I worked with the patches from the wireguard-openbsd repository after
I'll let you know who has sparc64 machines to help out:
kn was the developer who saw the problem. jca is also adept
enough to look at this with you.
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 07:39:01PM +1000, Matt Dunwoodie wrote:
> Hi tech,
>
> After some feedback and comments, we've addressed the concerns, and
> fixed a few things from our side too. Overall the structure is familiar
> with no major changes, so any prior readings mostly carry over.
>
> This
Hey tech@,
A few things I thought I should add to our v2 revision:
First, the improvements we've made in the last few weeks have been
pretty substantial, and we've now got a much more faithful protocol
implementation. I've been running this on a few high traffic servers,
and I'll probably move
28 matches
Mail list logo
