Forums

[gilshehbaz9]

This is a useful discussion, especially for anyone trying to manage VPN traffic on an application-by-application basis. I think using AllowedApps is a practical approach when you only need certain applications to use the WireGuard tunnel while keeping the rest of your normal internet traffic unchanged.

The point about specifying the full executable path is also worth highlighting, particularly when working with portable applications or separate installations. It would be interesting to see whether future versions could offer more flexible rules for distinguishing multiple instances of the same application, perhaps through their individual configurations or ports.

Overall, this makes WireSock a useful option for people who need more control over how their applications connect through a VPN.

[gilshehbaz9]

That’s a really interesting issue, especially considering the connection reaches the expected 10 Gbps speed when the driver is removed. It seems like NIC offloading or compatibility with the Marvell AQC113 could be worth investigating further. Testing different driver versions and network filter combinations might help narrow down the cause. Hopefully, a solution is found soon! 👍

[gilshehbaz9]

Yeah, this is a bit confusing with WireSock because the application split-tunneling and DNS handling work differently on Windows. WireSock can restrict the VPN tunnel to a specific application, but Windows DNS resolution is handled at the system level, so DNS queries aren’t automatically separated by application.

If your WireGuard profile has a DNS = entry, that resolver can be used while the tunnel is active, even though only one application is configured for the VPN. WireSock’s documentation confirms that DNS is system-wide on Windows and isn’t currently split per application.

You could try removing the DNS = line from the WireGuard configuration and let Windows continue using its normal DNS resolver. Just keep in mind that this also means the tunneled application won’t automatically get a separate VPN DNS server. If you need a separate DNS resolver for a particular application, you’d likely need an additional DNS/proxy solution rather than WireSock’s normal per-app split tunneling.

For anyone looking for more information about the game side of things, I also came across this website while researching related topics. The important part with WireSock, though, is that the application routing and DNS routing are two separate things.

[gilshehbaz9]

That’s a pretty significant drop, especially going from 10Gb to around 2.5Gb just from installing the driver. It’s interesting that the issue disappeared after moving from the VM to a physical machine. The VirtIO network adapter seems like an important detail here, since virtual NICs can behave quite differently with packet-filtering drivers and offloading features. Glad you were able to narrow it down.

[Author]

Posts