ѽ҉ᶬḳ℠ <[email protected]> writes: > Debian kernel 4.15.11 > WG 0.0.20180420-1 > > Out of curiosity having WG configured/manged via systemd, which is > working thus far as having the interface up and listening (also after > rebooting the server). > > Now I was looking to manipulate the network interface with some > post-up/post-down which though does not seems applicable with systemd, > like it would be when managed through networking.service.
You can't do one-line up/down scripts, but you could create a separate service file and have it depend on the wg interface... > Hence, wondering whether I miss something about systemd or whether it is > rather a bit of a disadvantage to configure/manage WG through systemd as > opposed to networking.service? > What is the benefit of systemd vs. networking.service WG management? If you're using systemd-networkd to configure the rest of your networking, having wireguard configured the same way can be useful; and systemd-networkd can manage dependencies between interfaces as well (to a certain extent). However, as you note, things like running arbitrary scripts is a bit more of a hassle... -Toke _______________________________________________ WireGuard mailing list [email protected] https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard
