Wireguard way slower than expected on AX1800 Flint

jdub · 2022-12-14T13:08:10.466Z

Again, are you running speedtest-cli on the router or are you running it on your computer?

People poopoo ovpn, but with the new routers that have cortex53’s, you can get performance that is on par with WG from older armv7 solutions. I doubt you’ll find a cheap TP-Link that will do 180mbps up/down on OpenVPN. But anyway.

Can you post your config file with keys redacted?

caesarsalad · 2022-12-14T13:20:44.539Z

You want me to SSH into the router and run it like that? Never done that, didn’t think that could be done.

Just redact the keys? Everything else is safe?

jdub · 2022-12-14T13:22:32.629Z

Yes, ssh into router, download / install speedtest (armhf) from link I sent way back, ungzip, run. The point is to answer whether the problem is the link itself or some sort of firewalling/NAT/something else.

I’d redact the endpoint IP too, but everything else is ok.

caesarsalad · 2022-12-14T13:23:33.063Z

Alright, I’ll try that. In the meantime…

[Interface]

PrivateKey = xxx

Address = 10.49.0.2

DNS = 172.21.63.94

[Peer]

PublicKey = xxx

PresharedKey = xxx

AllowedIPs = 0.0.0.0/0,::/0

Endpoint = xxx

jdub · 2022-12-14T13:27:19.515Z

Take out the DNS to see if that makes a difference, and add a /32 on the end of your address.

e.g. my current config:

[Interface]
Address = 10.75.50.50/32
ListenPort = 5320
PrivateKey = PK

[Peer]
AllowedIPs = 0.0.0.0/0
Endpoint = w.x.y.z:1234
PersistentKeepalive = 25
PublicKey = PK
PresharedKey = PK

caesarsalad · 2022-12-14T13:30:46.324Z

I actually sent the wrong config, but regardless I made those changes. Maybe a coincidence but it lowered ping by a little and now the download goes around 100 - 130. Still not great but better.

jdub · 2022-12-14T13:32:23.140Z

What is your output from

wg show

on the router? Basically, do we actually know that traffic is going through the tunnel?

(redact keys and endpoint)

caesarsalad · 2022-12-14T13:33:18.438Z

interface: wg0
public key: xxx
private key: xxx
listening port: 59585

peer: xxx
preshared key: xxx
endpoint: xxx
allowed ips: 0.0.0.0/0
latest handshake: 6 seconds ago
transfer: 789.91 MiB received, 85.33 MiB sent
persistent keepalive: every 25 seconds

jdub · 2022-12-14T13:35:34.242Z

Ok, that looks fine. If you run top on the router while a speedtest is running, what does the “idle” number at the top do?

alzhao · 2022-12-15T04:47:08.660Z

One parameter to manipulate is the mtu of wireguard interface.

You can find it in in UI. Try value between 1280 to 1380.

wgadm · 2024-05-27T13:07:11.299Z

Dea valued users.
I have the same problem with my Flint 2.

My Flint 2 is the WG Server and my ISP ADSL speed is 100 Mbits
My iPhone is the WG Client. Without active WG connection I've a speed with LTE 240 Mbits, with active WG connection 12 Mbits.

I've tried all of the solutions what you all recommended, but its not working.

Here my WG Client Config file details:

[Interface]
Address = 10.2.0.2/24
PrivateKey = blablablablablaE224=
DNS = 192.168.2.1 (I've tried every known DNS services. The DNS filed in the WG app is required)
MTU = 1400

[Peer]
AllowedIPs = 0.0.0.0/0,::/0
Endpoint = xyzxyzxyzxyz.glddns.com:5320
PersistentKeepalive = 25
PublicKey = blablablablablaA5646546484=

admon · 2024-05-27T13:08:29.692Z

12 Mbps is totally fine for 100 Mbps ADSL.
ADSL (a = asymmetric) means that your upload is waaaay slower than your download.

ADSL with 100 Mbps down will mostly have 10–20 Mbps up.
Since all your traffic from client will rout through your ADSL router first, the upload speed of your ISP will cap it.

wgadm · 2024-05-27T13:11:02.472Z

Ohhh noooo. Bad news. I hate my ISP.

But a question in addition: Is it same with Fiberglass connections?

admon · 2024-05-27T13:14:14.545Z

wgadm:

Is it same with Fiberglass connections?

Mostly not, but depends on your ISP and the contract.

wgadm · 2024-05-27T13:18:28.066Z

I did take a look on my contract. Its not a ADSL it is VDSL. Is there something different?

admon · 2024-05-27T13:20:17.766Z

Nah, not spoken of speed unfortunately.

wgadm · 2024-05-27T13:21:17.204Z

Thank you so much admon for your fast replay and support. Much appriciated!

admon · 2024-05-27T13:23:21.652Z

Danke für die Blumen

No problem

wgadm · 2024-05-27T13:36:23.387Z

gern geschehen.

Another question. I'm trying and looking for solution of policy/domain based routing to different VPN servers. But with GL.inet it is not possible, right? It's allowed to have one active VPN server to route specific domains or IP's through this VPN service.

admon · 2024-05-27T13:37:31.624Z

Not yet possible. There are feature requests for this for upcoming firmware.
Right now you can only go with 1 VPN uplink at the time.