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

Remove WireGuard KeepAlive and include as an option in config #1251

Closed
digeratus opened this issue Dec 15, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Remove WireGuard KeepAlive and include as an option in config #1251

digeratus opened this issue Dec 15, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@digeratus
Copy link

The default AlgoVPN installation creates wireguard conf files with the Persistent keepalive setting to 25. A setting of 25 makes sense behind some corporate firewalls and NAT, but not for mobile devices like Android or iOS.

Considering that the Wireguard conf available via Algo is meant to be for Android users, it should definitely be changed to 0. Othewise, users data usage will skyrocket.

@digeratus digeratus changed the title Change Wireguard persisten keepalive default to 0, not 25 Change Wireguard persistent keepalive default to 0, not 25 Dec 15, 2018
@digeratus
Copy link
Author

Please at least make it configurable in config.cfg.

It isn’t clear to me that “25 makes sense behind some corporate firewalls and NAT, but not for mobile devices like Android or iOS.” Do very few people use Android / iOS with Algo behind NAT?

Hard to tell. But there's one thing I do know, an app that kills data is an app that won't be used for long. As it is on Android and iOS one can change that setting manually after installation. I believe the current setting is way too high.

https://www.wireguard.com/quickstart/#nat-and-firewall-traversal-persistence

@davidemyers
Copy link
Contributor

davidemyers commented Dec 15, 2018

My understanding is that PersistentKeepalive should not be needed when a WireGuard client is behind a firewall and/or NAT unless that client is providing some sort of network service and will need to listen for connections initiated by systems on the other side of the firewall and/or NAT.

As far as data usage goes, I tried to run a test to see how much additional data PersistentKeepalive uses. While my testing methodology turned out to be flawed, it appeared that the data usage was much smaller than I expected. Has anyone else tried to measure how much data PersistentKeepalive generates?

@davidemyers
Copy link
Contributor

I reran some tests and hopefully got it right this time. From what I can tell PersistentKeepalive = 25 would use about 8 MB per month.

So although unnecessary for most it doesn't appear to be detrimental in terms of data consumption.

For mobile devices there may be an impact on battery life but I don't know how to measure that. For my iOS devices I'll continue to remove PersistentKeepalive since they work fine without it.

If anyone else gets different results please post them.

@adamluk
Copy link
Contributor

adamluk commented Dec 24, 2018

This seems to have come about from issue #1068. I disable it though as no need for my usage. For mobile devices it doesn't make sense to enable - perhaps this should default to 0, with option in config?

@zx2c4
Copy link

zx2c4 commented Feb 17, 2019

Algo has little reason to enable PersistentKeepalive.

@dguido dguido changed the title Change Wireguard persistent keepalive default to 0, not 25 Remove WireGuard KeepAlive and include as an option in config Feb 17, 2019
@dguido dguido added this to To do in Algo Development Feb 17, 2019
@dguido dguido moved this from To do to 1.0 in Algo Development Feb 18, 2019
@jackivanov jackivanov moved this from 1.0 to In progress in Algo Development Feb 22, 2019
@jackivanov jackivanov moved this from In progress to 1.0 in Algo Development Feb 22, 2019
@jackivanov jackivanov moved this from 1.0 to In progress in Algo Development Feb 23, 2019
@jackivanov jackivanov moved this from In progress to Done in Algo Development Feb 25, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants