[Babel-users] tunnels

[Justin Kilpatrick]

> > On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 12:01:54AM -0700, Dave Taht wrote:
> I get that bandwidth figure a lot for wireguard. I care about  latency
> far, far more under a full bidirectional load. Having got base wifi so
> much better, and the edge connections sqm-scripts massively better, I
> am wondering if wireguard got on the stick yet?
> 
> I wrote about this problem in an early version of wireguard here:
> http://blog.cerowrt.org/post/wireguard/
> 
> As of kernel 4.4 (?) ipsec does take advantage of the fq_codel hash.
> the before latency was 100+ms in the tunnel for voip, 2ms after.

I can confirm that fq_codel works with Wireguard tunnels just fine. The latency added by a tunneled hop is around 1-2ms. 

Here's some iperf data, but not as latency focused as you would probably like. 

https://forum.altheamesh.com/t/althea-performance/44/3