Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support custom wireguard options #6639

Open
tomlawesome opened this issue Feb 2, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Support custom wireguard options #6639

tomlawesome opened this issue Feb 2, 2024 · 1 comment
Labels
kind/feature New features / enhancements

Comments

@tomlawesome
Copy link

Problem Description

I wish to use custom WG configuration, instead of hard-coded values in the python, I read #5562 (review) and I understand the desire to not have lots of code to parse existing configs.

Proposal

Add additional options to the wireguard.conf file. The pub/priv keys are already stored here, and other variables could also be stored here too, such is IPs, listen ports for both instance/peer/dns and in particular, endpoint.

The file could easily be populated by default with the static config already there, which would provide customisation at no expense to those who do not wish to manually enter anything.

Alternatives

There is not really one that requires less effort, but the alternative would be to allow the use of standard wireguard config formats.

Additional context

In my case I have an LTE router at another location and I want to connect mitmproxy via my existing wireguard setup, which uses a FQDN as a means of conveying the current IP, due to having a dynamic one so that I can proxy the webUIs available there over the tunnel.

It would also be nice one day to reintroduce the multi-peer support so one instance of MITM can serve multiple remote locations or devices without having to share a common WG tunnel.

@tomlawesome tomlawesome added the kind/feature New features / enhancements label Feb 2, 2024
@mhils
Copy link
Member

mhils commented Feb 2, 2024

Which specific additional options would you want to add, and which additional use cases do they enable?

It would also be nice one day to reintroduce the multi-peer support

FWIW, you can already pass --mode multiple times and serve multiple users from different ports.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/feature New features / enhancements
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants