SVI/netbird
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird.git synced 2026-06-10 01:12:51 -04:00
Code Issues 3.0k Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Add option to force P2P connection via WebRTC #981

New Issue
Open
opened 2025-11-20 05:20:57 -05:00 by saavagebueno · 1 comment
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:20:57 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @ghost on GitHub (Jun 15, 2024).

In https://docs.netbird.io/about-netbird/how-netbird-works, it shows P2P traffic tunneling directly through WireGuard. If I understand correctly, this is raw, unencapsulated WireGuard traffic.

In some networks, WireGuard traffic may be restricted, and since Netbird already supports WebRTC for relaying, it would be helpful to add an option to use it for P2P connections.

This can be accomplished in a number of ways:

  • Client-side environment variables
  • Setting server-side ACL for some peers
  • Global settings on the server

Related: #1096

Originally created by @ghost on GitHub (Jun 15, 2024). In https://docs.netbird.io/about-netbird/how-netbird-works, it shows P2P traffic tunneling directly through WireGuard. If I understand correctly, this is raw, unencapsulated WireGuard traffic. In some networks, WireGuard traffic may be restricted, and since Netbird already supports WebRTC for relaying, it would be helpful to add an option to use it for P2P connections. This can be accomplished in a number of ways: - Client-side environment variables - Setting server-side ACL for some peers - Global settings on the server Related: #1096
saavagebueno added the feature-request label 2025-11-20 05:20:57 -05:00
saavagebueno commented 2025-11-20 05:20:58 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@braginini commented on GitHub (Jun 19, 2024):

hey @thinadusk
Your understanding is correct - the traffic is raw WireGuard traffic.
The change that you are proposing is not as easy as it sounds and requires the whole transport logic refactor.
NetBird uses ICE from WebRTC to negotiate direct connections. However, it doesn't use data channels of WebRTC.
We had some thoughts around it but we lack a real strong use case that would benefit most of the users.

Bottom line, I don't think that we will persue this in the near future. However, we are working on relay improvements that might help with these issues.

What is your environment that blocks WireGuard?

@braginini commented on GitHub (Jun 19, 2024): hey @thinadusk Your understanding is correct - the traffic is raw WireGuard traffic. The change that you are proposing is not as easy as it sounds and requires the whole transport logic refactor. NetBird uses ICE from WebRTC to negotiate direct connections. However, it doesn't use data channels of WebRTC. We had some thoughts around it but we lack a real strong use case that would benefit most of the users. Bottom line, I don't think that we will persue this in the near future. However, we are working on relay improvements that might help with these issues. What is your environment that blocks WireGuard?
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
2021 Q4
2022 Q1
2022 Q1
accessibility
acl
agent
agent
Android
Android
api
authentik
automation
azure
battery-usage
bug
cache
client
client-ui
cloud
cloud-only
cloudflare
community
compatibility
config-idp
config-issue
connection
contribution
coturn
cross-vpn
dashboard
data-usage
distribution
dns
docker
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
enhancement
event-stream
feature-request
freebsd
getting-started
go
good first issue
gui
help wanted
home-assistant
idp
inconsistency
integration
integrations
ios
ipv6
jwt
k8s
keycloak
linux
login
macos
management-service
missing-docs
mobile
moved-internal
needs-review
netbird-ui
networking
new-platform
nginx
notification
okta
openwrt
packaging
peer-management
peer-management
peer-management
performance
postgres
posture-checks
psk
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 question
refactor
relay
release
rfc
routes
security
security-related
self-hosting
server
signal
sleep-issue
ssh
ssl
status
store
synology
system-compatibility-issue
test-suite
third-party-integration
triage
triage-needed
troubleshooting
UX
waiting-feedback
windows
wontfix
zitadel
No Label feature-request
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
saavagebueno
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: SVI/netbird#981
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?