Re: "wireguard" implementation improperly merged and needs revert

[Tom Ivar Helbekkmo <tih%hamartun.priv.no@localhost>]

Maxime Villard <max%M00nBSD.net@localhost> writes:

> [Very reasonable arguments, with which I agree]

> However, moving it to a development branch would probably be a good
> move; it would eliminate the confusion as to whether it is
> production-ready (which it isn't yet), while still allowing people to
> make changes and development to happen.

While there are certainly improvements that could be made (Taylor has
pointed some out, and I would add making it possible to do traffic
shaping in the tunnels using ALTQ), I have been happily using our wg
implementation for two years.  While ozaki-r was writing the code, I
helped him debug it, and I've been using it since, communicating between
several instances of NetBSD on amd64 and aarch64, Linux on amd64, and
Android phones.  It's been performing perfectly -- not surprising, as
ozaki-r very carefully implemented it to the published specification.

-tih
-- 
Most people who graduate with CS degrees don't understand the significance
of Lisp.  Lisp is the most important idea in computer science.  --Alan Kay