Hacker News Reader

It is really no difference between setting up Wireguard on a local network or via Internet as long as one of the hosts can listen to a public UDP port. If one of your clients are behind a NAT you may need to enable the keep alive option in the client's config

View on HN

Sadly some public networks I had to use were blocking Wireguard, while my IPSec VPN would easily go through each time :(

I wish there was an option to obfuscate the traffic as a plain HTTPS connection, but that would defeat the idea of keeping Wireguard simple.

My client is indeed behind a NAT. I'll just wait until Wireguard is more mainstream and extremely detailed guides are up.

Admittedly, I haven't gotten around to actually using WireGuard yet, but I think it's pretty much as simple as Linuskendall said. https://www.wireguard.com/quickstart/#nat-and-firewall-trave...

Also see this guide on using a public VPS with a Wireguard server to share resources behind two different NAT'd networks: https://staaldraad.github.io/2017/04/17/nat-to-nat-with-wire...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com