Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

One of the main selling points of Wireguard is that it runs much leaner than OpenVPN or IPSec tunnels, especially on embedded hardware, so there isn’t much of a workload in the first place.


Crypto used by IPSec (aes, sha) is often accelerated by hardware - and the above mentioned Ubiquiti has hardware for that. Chacha/Poly used by Wireguard are not.


There’s a benchmark done with the EdgeRouter that shows that Wireguard’s throughput exceeds that of hardware accelerated AES + IPSec:

https://an.undulating.space/post/181227-er_alternate_firmwar...

Of course, benchmarks from random strangers are not gospel, and the results aren’t particularly damning. But even then, you’re assuming that you have the luxury of running on a chip that comes with a hardware crypto engine. Good luck trying to get AES encryption/decryption speeds at anywhere near line rate with a Raspberry Pi or a run-of-the-mill router.


IPsec is pretty light.


Doesn't feel light to setup if you're trying to get a tunnel working between different providers. We had a strange dead peer issue between Fortigate and Mikrotik and could never figure it out as it happened so rarely. All phase 1 and phase 2 settings were identical. I can imagine that happens elsewhere too.


Try enabling Dead Peer Detection (DPD).


Both sides had that on from the beginning.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: