Why are there two WireGuard plugins?

[hushcoden]

I'm trying to understand why there are two WireGuard plugins, os-wireguard & os-wireguard-go, both on the same version 1.13_5 (and same size, 55.5 KiB), and in case which one to install.

Tia.

[Seimus]

There are two different implementations of WG the GO version and the kernel version

os-wireguard       - Kernel Version
os-wireguard-go  - Go Version

The Kernel version can perform better because its implementation allows to use better resources. However the Kernel implementation is still new to OPN. When you check the NOTEs under the package it sways exactly that + that there can be some security/vulnerability implications.

I tried both, both work Okay (Kernel performs better). Didn't see any problems with it.

P.S. always read the attachment notes for a specific plugin/package

Regards,
S.

[hushcoden]

P.S. always read the attachment notes for a specific plugin/package

Thanks, much clearer now, but in my case if I click on the info icon on the right of the plugin, I get the same notes ??

[Seimus]

Have the same.

Not Sure why the notes are same for both of them when there is a difference in the implementation.

That was as well one of the reason why I tested both.

Regards,
S.

[tiermutter]

Fo me I can see no clear gain in speed but since using kmod, CPU load is much higher when daily backup runs through the tunnel.

[Seimus]

Same here seeing higher CPU load with kmod, but kinda thats what I would expect.

Regards,
S.

[franco]

The plugin code is the same for both. Only the dependencies are different... It's how WireGuard tools want to handle the situation.


Cheers,
Franco

[Seimus]

The plugin code is the same for both. Only the dependencies are different... It's how WireGuard tools want to handle the situation.


Cheers,
Franco

I really thought it had to be little bit re-implemented to have the kmod version on OPN. Now this gives sense, as well why the package notes are the same. Thanks for clearing this!

Regards,
S.