[Discuss] Wireguard and Traveling and Network Overlaps oh my!

[richard.pieri at gmail.com (Rich Pieri)]

On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 11:46:09 -0700
Kent Borg <kentborg at borg.org> wrote:

> Just so long as you don't need access to the local version of those 
> addresses. (The hotel's gateway to get to the rest of the internet?
> DNS? Room service?)

Exactly. In my case my home network address space is local to the hotel
network and therefore home network traffic won't be routed through the
VPN unless I do something like this:

sudo ip route add 192.168.1.0/24 via 10.6.0.1

but this would knock me off the network because the hotel gateway IP is
192.168.1.1 and traffic for this IP would be routed through the VPN
tunnel -- including the tunnel itself. I'd turn the tunnel into a torus
which isn't a useful network topology that I know of.

10.6.0.0/24 is my VPN network. The VPN itself was fine: I could still
ssh into my network to verify that much.

Given some of the suggestions so far, I think I could have used the
routing table to route specific IP addresses through the tunnel
interface maybe like this:

sudo ip route add 192.168.1.52 via 10.6.0.1	# DNS/pi-hole
sudo ip route add 192.168.1.202 via 10.6.0.1	# IMAP
sudo ip route add 192.168.1.51 via 10.6.0.1	# Nextcloud

Will try this next time I find myself with address collisions.

-- 
\m/ (--) \m/