Skip to content

Conversation

@MariaBego56
Copy link

@MariaBego56 MariaBego56 commented Oct 26, 2025

Description

Updated the diagram representation for the WireGuard VPN site-to-site configuration to use Mermaid syntax for better visualization.


Related Issue

If this pull request addresses an existing issue, please link to it below. Use the Fixes #<issue-number> syntax to
close the issue automatically when the pull request is merged.

Example:

  • Fixes: #1234

Contributor License Agreement (CLA)

By contributing to this project, you agree to the terms of
the Canonical Contributor License Agreement (CLA).
If you have not already signed the CLA, please do so here.


Commit Message for Squash Merge

We typically squash commits when merging. You can specify the commit message that should be used in this case if you wish.
Provide the desired commit message below:

[(optional) category] Brief description of changes made, and why


Checklist


Additional Notes (Optional)

Add any extra information or context that reviewers may need to know. This could include testing instructions,
screenshots, or links to related discussions.


Thank you for contributing to the Ubuntu Server documentation!

Updated the diagram representation for the WireGuard VPN site-to-site configuration to use Mermaid syntax for better visualization.
Copy link
Contributor

@slyon slyon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Similar to my comment in #383 the diagram does not seem to render correctly in the staging environment of our documentation. I'm unclear if that's expected or a bug.

Looking at the diagram in mermaid.live it mostly matches the ASCII logic, which two small issues:

  • todo: the "WireGuard tunnel" box should be going through/via the "public internet" entity.
  • nitpick (non-blocking): we now have 2 "..." boxes per site, whereas the ASCII diagram wanted to show that there could be more boxes/entities by using "..." on the side. Maybe we could have a box "X", box "Y" and box "..." to visualize that.

@MariaBego56
Copy link
Author

I will try to update following your suggestions @slyon. Bear with me, please, I am very new at this 😁

Copy link
Collaborator

@s-makin s-makin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @MariaBego56 for this patch, and for your work on these diagrams!

The diagram is currently not rendering in the preview. I've added a suggestion below for how to fix it - if you accept the suggestion and commit it, the preview will rebuild and we should be able to see the diagram as you intended :)


The following code-block will be rendered as a Mermaid diagram:

```mermaid
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
```mermaid
```{mermaid}

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've tested on my own local branch and putting the curly brackets around mermaid should "encourage" Sphinx to recognize this as a mermaid diagram :) if you can apply this change, when the preview is rebuilt it should show the diagram properly


Another usual VPN configuration where one could deploy WireGuard is to connect two distinct networks over the internet. Here is a simplified diagram:

The following code-block will be rendered as a Mermaid diagram:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
The following code-block will be rendered as a Mermaid diagram:

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure what this line is for, but it's saying the same thing as on line 4 so let's remove it to avoid duplication :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants