WireGuard in pfSense 2.5 Performance
-
@brians Thanks for sharing! Would you be mind running iperf3 tests and share those as well? That'd remove any bottlenecks from SMB protocol or your NAS disks. You seem to have a very good setup since both locations share the same ISP, so I am curious to see iperf3 tests. Thanks!
-
@xparanoik
I waited until after work to do.
This is from a Windows 10 PC 192.168.10.140 at home connected to pfsense at work 192.168.21.1In past testing sometimes I get a bit higher send from my house in the 900's but today didn't seem to.
-
@brians Nice, thanks for sharing
-
WireGuard performance should soon be much improved:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=FreeBSD-New-WireGuard
-
Oof. Not exactly a shining endorsement. I feel bad for Netgate here. They paid for Wireguard in FreeBSD because nobody else gave a damn and then a month after release, the protocol creator shows up and redoes it all for free.
-
@kom ugh... I’ll be anxiously biting my nails. The next 24-48 hrs are delicate for everyone involved.
-
https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/wireguard/2021-March/006499.html
JFC, this is not shaping up to be professional conversation and collaboration. Netgate/pfSense I am so disappointed... Argh...
-
This post is deleted! -
@kom why feel bad for netgate?
netgate decided to spend money on one of their products & got a working "thingy" as a result ... netgate's goal has been meta month later someone else claims they'll supply an even better "thingy" for free.
this doesn't even matter to netgate because the decision to spend money on "thingy" is in the past. the money is gonewhat does matter:
we get a shit-throwing competition on reddit / phoronix & a mailing list
all this for FREE ... opensource entertainment at it's finest -
@heper It seems that Netgate should have coordinated with Jason D. and perhaps get his input on the patches they planned to submit, then this could have been avoided.
-
Netgate is being completely trashed in the comments of the Ars article. It seems that Netgate Scott's msg to Donenfeld isn't being received very well.
-
@xparanoik
Only the parties involved can comment on that.... Shoulda woulda coulda are pointless when uttered by outsiders -
@heper But my suggestion is still objectively a positive thing, assume the opposite is exactly what happeneed as said by Jason himself (and confirmed via other means, such as other mailing list threads).
-
@heper this has nothing to do with "FREE". I don't want to be a Netgate customer or use products if the company is going to treat the open-source community which its ENTIRE product line is based off of, both TSNR and pfSense, like garbage and threaten them when they speak up/out.
I sort-of got the whole pfSense+ thing. Seeing things like the Wireguard contributions, made me think they still know that open-source is a big portion of their ecosystem.
But... Scott is acting 1000% unprofessional. Jason's reply was after months of trying to work with Netgate, which apparently went unanswered. And then Scott, so unprofessionally threatens Jason with blog post "warning people not to work with him"... now its the whole OPNsense stuff all over again.
Netgate, grow up. Admit your Wireguard port was not quality, you failed to work with Wireguard properly, apologize to Jason, and more forward with the community.
-
@dirtyfreebooter said in WireGuard in pfSense 2.5 Performance:
Netgate/pfSense I am so disappointed... Argh...
That was an interesting read. Disappointed sounds charitable, childish comes to my mind.
It's going to be hard for Netgate to get past this. I do hope someone has the courage to take ownership, admit what needs to be admitted and set the tone for a more adult demeanor going forward. Any words from Netgate (blog post or whatnot) will sound disingenuous. I guess you make your bed, you have to sleep in it.
Makes me wonder what will make it past code review when they bring out the re-worked, closed source, product?
-
-
This post is deleted! -
As predicted, disingenuous. I'd call it typical CYA, but it's too defensive to be that.
A dog knows not to poop where they eat. Scott?
-
yea, this is insane..
We had hoped for a better collaboration than this, and it makes me doubt the motives of the attackers. And yes, I make deliberate use of the word “attacker” here, because that’s what this is, an attack on Netgate and on the FreeBSD and pfSense communities.
JFC. I looked at the code review. Dear god, its nothing like the linux implementation, and if anyone should be critical, Jason is the AUTHOR of Wireguard. Scott did not address why Jason's communication went unanswered or why they didn't reach out to Wireguard in the first place. And I wasn't even looking for a complete apology, I think both sides handled stuff badly and lessons could be learnt, but Netgate not admitting to anything, including the piss-poor threats to Jason, is just gross.
i am new to pfSense, I just started using it when 2.4.5 came out. Read about the OPNsense non-sense and was really turned off, but hell, there are always too sides to the story. Seeing this unfold and the way Netgate is responding makes me sick.
So what have I learned from this? I’ve learned to be a little less trusting.
I have learned not to trust Netgate. I guess it time to look at alternatives, which is a shame, because one, i never thought i would be this person, saying in a forum that i am leaving Netgate because they are totally unprofessional, and two, because pfSense is a really nice project and product. I was really looking forward to some new hardware in 2021 and moving from my self-built setup to an official netgate setup this year.
-
new freebsd mailing list activity...
https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/wireguard/2021-March/006504.html
Kyle from FreeBSD, admitting his mistakes and moving forward.
Scott from Netgate, writing a finger pointing blog post.
