It doesn't. It just foresaw the need to be able to dynamically configure tunnels on first connection and specified all of that. Which seems to me is a lot of what fly io has just mostly reimplemented here.
In any case the point is I would prefer to just have the basic components available and let me piece them together however I want. Mostly to allow using the underlying technology in more contexts that it is currently available in.
Heh, it really sounds like your needs would be better served with IPSec or something. WireGuard was born precisely because they saw that the whole problem making other existing solutions difficult to audit and insecure-in-practice was their thousand ways to configure. So they did the opposite. Low lines of code, few possibilities.
In software you often choose between a small monolith and a big kitchen sink. Once you have 1 more need than the monolith covers, you have to go over to the kitchen sink.
akira2501|1 year ago
In any case the point is I would prefer to just have the basic components available and let me piece them together however I want. Mostly to allow using the underlying technology in more contexts that it is currently available in.
medstrom|1 year ago
In software you often choose between a small monolith and a big kitchen sink. Once you have 1 more need than the monolith covers, you have to go over to the kitchen sink.