<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Feature request: FQDN for wireguard local and remote endpoint IP]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Giddily updated to 21.02 and was looking forward to setting up a site to site wireguard connection when I discovered that I cannot use a FQDN for the end point IPs. I have dynamic service so putting the IP i currently have at either end is futile. I couldn't find any bug tracker entry or other thread about this. Netgate - any hopes this is on the list of things to further develop?</p>
<p dir="auto">Other than that, update has been great and I encountered no issues on my 5100s.</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netgate.com/topic/160965/feature-request-fqdn-for-wireguard-local-and-remote-endpoint-ip</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2026 13:01:37 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://forum.netgate.com/topic/160965.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2021 22:20:20 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Feature request: FQDN for wireguard local and remote endpoint IP on Fri, 19 Feb 2021 15:54:09 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Well I'm an idiot. You CAN use a FQDN in the peer configuration. Way to go Netgate!</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netgate.com/post/965439</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.netgate.com/post/965439</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[gabacho4]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2021 15:54:09 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>