From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adolf Belka To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: Feedback on WG Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 13:17:19 +0200 Message-ID: <4fc9b5e3-7f20-4650-a6f0-32ec9a51b8cc@ipfire.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0502628562720606918==" List-Id: --===============0502628562720606918== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Michael, Getting back to testing out the WG. On 21/08/2024 16:23, Michael Tremer wrote: > Hello Adolf, >=20 >> On 19 Aug 2024, at 12:04, Adolf Belka wrote: >> >> Hi Michael, >> >> Sorry for the delay with feedback on the WG testing. I was a bit tied up w= ith DIY stuff in the house. >=20 > No problem... >=20 >> By manually importing the WG config file created I was able to successfull= y connect from my laptop to my IPFire vm system. The WUI showed connected. Th= e config file had my allowed subnets set as 192.168.200.0/255.255.255.0 whic= h is the green subnet on my vm system. However trying ping over the WG tunnel= gave failures for the IP of the vm machine, green1, and also for the green i= nterface of the vm IPFire. >=20 > Okay, connecting should be nice and easy. However, you *should* be able to = transfer some data... >=20 >> Trying to ping with the FQDN for the green1 system resulted in no resolvin= g of green1's FQDN to a local IP but tried to send it to my main red interfac= e with my ISP. >=20 > Can you try to ping from either side? The client the firewall and the firew= all the client? That should work if the tunnel is up. Tried again to ping from laptop to IPFire green lan, both the IPFire green in= terface and a vm PC on the green lan. In both cases 100% packet loss. I then tried doing the ping from the vm machine on the green IPFire lan to th= e laptop, as you suggested and in this case I got 100% packet transmission. In all above tests I used IP's to remove any question about DNS resolving. So the ping seems to only be working in one direction. Let me know if there a= re any other tests or checks I should do based on this result. Regards, Adolf. >=20 >> So something appears to be missing or incorrect with the routing but not s= ure what. >> >> Minor points on the WUI. >=20 > I would like to have the thing working first before we spend any time on ma= king the UI look nice, but you are raising very good points. >=20 >> When disconnected the status section that is coloured red is huge and the = space for the remark is very small but when connected then the status space i= s large enough to have the connected status word, giving much more room for t= he remark. >=20 > That should not be. No idea why that is, but I am sure that is not too hard= to fix. >=20 >> When the WG config file is created and you have the page with the QR code,= there is also a message about the WG config file only being shown this one t= ime as it contains private key material. The message is fine but the heading = for the message is "Oops, something went wrong...". It should really be somet= hing like "Information Note" or equivalent as it is not an actual error messa= ge. >=20 > I think I created a little widget which I used somewhere else too and then = added the headline. It certainly does not fit here. >=20 > -Michael >=20 >> >> See the screenshots attached. >> >> Regards, >> >> Adolf. >> >=20 --===============0502628562720606918==--