Support will be removed on both client and server side.

The process of removing OpenVPN from our app starts today and may be completed much earlier.

  • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    Except the 5 device limit. With OVPN it means 5 connected devices, with WG it means 5 registered public keys.

    Say you use the official Mullvad app and also setup some 3rd party WG client on your phone. That’s now taking up 2 devices. Or perhaps you do have 6 devices, but you never have more than 2 of them running at once. With WG, that’s still 6 devices regardless of them being connected or not, while with OVPN it will indeed be just 2 devices.

    • RecallMadness@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      23 days ago

      One of my devices uses three keys because out of the two local servers I have, they seem to go down every other month, so I need a failover.

      • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        24 days ago

        I already commented on this, but do they actually block you from setting up multiple devices with the same key?

        I’ve had my own server node for a while, there’s nothing stopping me from using the same key and config on multiple client devices, as long as I don’t connect them at the same time.

        I’m not limited to five keys, obviously, but the keys aren’t device specific. I could set up just one on the server, and then use it everywhere.

        Does Mullwad stop this in some way?

        • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          24 days ago

          I already commented on this, but do they actually block you from setting up multiple devices with the same key?

          I don’t think that’s possible to block, but it could lead to problems (responses not arriving) when both devices try to use the same key.

          • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            24 days ago

            Well yeah, you’d still have the limitation that you can’t connect multiple devices at the same time. But the idea is that just like before, nothing is actually stopping you from having as many devices as you like ready to go, all able to be used one at a time.

    • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      24 days ago

      That’s a pity.

      Is there something preventing you from having the same key ready for use on more than one device? So that two devices that are never connected at the same time can take turns using the same key?

    • PunkiBas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      23 days ago

      This is a great point, if they’re gonna make this change, they should allow unlimited keys (or at least more than 5) and just limit the number of simultaneous devices on wireguard too. If that’s feasable

      • NekuSoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 days ago

        It might be feasible, but it’s a bit awkward to implement because Wireguard is stateless and doesn’t know if a client is offline or just hasn’t sent any traffic for some time.

    • communism@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 days ago

      That’s true. I use user profiles on GrapheneOS and have to have each profile count as its own device in Mullvad, when obviously I’m not going to be using them simultaneously.