On the macos and android client, the allowed addresses are automatically installed into the routing table.
On the mikrotik, this doesn’t happen. The /32 address that I have assigned to the session doesn’t get installed into the IP route table, and I have to add a static route. I would expect this to automatically appear in the routing table when the tunnel is active.
Is there a mikrotikian reason why this isn’t the case?
This is on 7.9.1.
Since when does MT= Auto, okay other than quickset, but I see Normis is trying with some auto generation of wg setups!
https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=182340
Short answer, MT only creates routes automatically for local subnets./interfaces, not unknown remote subnets.
I suppose one could look at any subnets in allowed IPs or individual IPs and do the same, assuming they are not part of the wireguard subnet already.
Okay, thanks. I guess I’m just used to Cisco / other VPNs that automatically add the routes. I’ve added appropriate static routes.
If an address with network is assigned to wg interface, the route will be added automatically.
Stating the obvious…
if an address is created on the router it would be routed automatically…
AKA Any interface with an address on the router gets a DAC routing…
More to the point regarding wireguard..
any subnet you have in allowed IPs, if not local on the router must have a routing.
Another subtle point, is that wireguard interface can have multiple subnets assigned to it.
One example might be three routers, RA - server, RB and RC and client routers.
The wireguard subnet on A are 10.10.10.0/24, 10.20.20.0/24, 10.30.30.0/24
The wireguard subnet on B is 10.20.20.0/24
The wireguard subnet on C is 10.30.30.0/24
Or they could all have the same subnet 10.10.10.0/24
Side note:
I so recall the moments you were 1000% against assigning addresses to a WG itf and the subsequent discussion with mkx and sob 
It could be done without assigning addresses just fine, but its more efficient to do so with addresses.
Lots of ways to configure RoS…