[GH-ISSUE #57] Option to select the network controller? #48

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-05-05 04:51:43 -06:00 by gitea-mirror · 2 comments

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 04:51:43 -06:00

Owner

Originally created by @mario98 on GitHub (Jun 6, 2018).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/debauchee/barrier/issues/57

Is there an option to select the specific network controller that should be used for connection?

If not, do you think such an option could be implemented?

Originally created by @mario98 on GitHub (Jun 6, 2018). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/debauchee/barrier/issues/57 Is there an option to select the specific network controller that should be used for connection? If not, do you think such an option could be implemented?

gitea-mirror closed this issue

2026-05-05 04:51:44 -06:00

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 04:51:48 -06:00

Author

Owner

@dayne commented on GitHub (Jun 7, 2018):

The server binds to 0.0.0.0 by default meaning the port (24800) is open for business on all interfaces/networks on a system.

I think this is the correct behavior and can be managed at firewall level "I want to allow traffic from X network or X.Y IP to connect to my synergy port". I've had to handle this in the past and securing it at the firewall level for networks/IPs felt right.

Having to worry about an additional launch option/parameter to restrict the port binding to a specific network interface does not feel right at all.

That said if you want to restrict at the server level which network the port is open on it allows for that already using the -a or --address option.

barriers --help shows the following hint for this:

The argument for --address is of the form: [][:]. The
hostname must be the address or hostname of an interface on the system.
Placing brackets around an IPv6 address is required when also specifying
a port number and optional otherwise. The default is to listen on all
interfaces using port number 24800.

Given that typically a network controller is handling just a single network you are getting the effect you I think you are asking for. Recommend closing this issue as I think the core feature being requested is available already.

@dayne commented on GitHub (Jun 7, 2018): The server binds to 0.0.0.0 by default meaning the port (24800) is open for business on all interfaces/networks on a system. I think this is the correct behavior and can be managed at firewall level "I want to allow traffic from X network or X.Y IP to connect to my synergy port". I've had to handle this in the past and securing it at the firewall level for networks/IPs felt right. Having to worry about an additional launch option/parameter to restrict the port binding to a specific network interface does not feel right at all. That said if you want to restrict at the server level which network the port is open on it allows for that already using the `-a` or `--address` option. `barriers --help` shows the following hint for this: > The argument for --address is of the form: [<hostname>][:<port>]. The > hostname must be the address or hostname of an interface on the system. > Placing brackets around an IPv6 address is required when also specifying > a port number and optional otherwise. The default is to listen on all > interfaces using port number 24800. Given that _typically_ a network controller is handling just a single network you are getting the effect you I think you are asking for. Recommend closing this issue as I think the core feature being requested is available already.

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 04:51:51 -06:00

Author

Owner

@mario98 commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2018):

Ok, I see.

I also found out that in my setup, a connection via. the network I wanted is not possible anyway; I have a VPN that block every other network (blocking split tunneling). So it's not a missing option that holds me back, but the VPN of my company (which makes sense from a security perspective).

@mario98 commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2018): Ok, I see. I also found out that in my setup, a connection via. the network I wanted is not possible anyway; I have a VPN that block every other network (blocking split tunneling). So it's not a missing option that holds me back, but the VPN of my company (which makes sense from a security perspective).

gitea-mirror referenced this issue

2026-05-05 07:56:04 -06:00

[PR #48] [MERGED] use pkg-config for finding avahi include dir #1548

gitea-mirror referenced this issue

2026-05-05 07:56:24 -06:00

[PR #86] [MERGED] Merge pkgconfig branch into master #1560