Accessing your home network that is kept inside a NAT by your ISP, without you having to acquire an online server somewhere.
Comment on Friendly reminder that Tailscale is VC-funded and driving towards IPO
gravitywell@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
Just use normal wireguard, why do you need tails or heads at all?
TheFrogThatFlies@lemmy.world 1 month ago
gravitywell@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
Except you do need to acquire an online server somewhere, its just one that tailscale owns and controls instead of you, and when tailscale decides to enshittify and kill of their free tier you’ll be left wondering why you didn’t just rent a cheap VPS sooner.
Ask yourself, what is tailscale getting out of those “free” users that makes it worth providing services to them that they’d otherwsie need to rent a VPS for? What do you think their response would be if for example they got pressured about maybe too many users on their network are running a certain video streaming app?
Flatfire@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
You really don’t though. I use wireguard myself under the same scenario without issue. You just need to use some form of dynamic DNS to mitigate the potentially changing IP. Even if you’re using Tailscale you’ll still need to have something running a service all the time anyways, so may as well skip the proxy.
festus@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Your approach won’t work if you’re behind carrier grade NAT or you can’t open ports. My landlord provides my internet so I use tailscale (with headscale on my long distance vps) to connect everything and it works great. It uses LAN when I’m home, and NAT punches when I’m elsewhere.
TheFrogThatFlies@lemmy.world 1 month ago
If you only need to worry about the IP changing, then your ISP is not using NAT, or CGNAT as it is better known. I’m pretty sure that you can also use port forwarding, which is not commonly available under CGNAT.
Flatfire@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Ah, I see where I got confused. Yeah, CGNAT isn’t very common around here. I don’t think I’ve ever run into an ISP that uses it. I can see how that complicates things.
ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
Or be like me stuck in the 2000s using OpenVPN still in 2025 lol
ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
Tailscale offers way more then just wireguard. ACLs, NAT traversal etc. etc.
While some use cases can be replaced with traditional wireguard, others not.
gravitywell@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
I’m curious what kind of a use case you can think of that “traditional wireguard” can’t replace tailscale for.
Tailscale has a maximum of 3 users on their free tier, so it seems like a super limited use case of people who DIY their own servers for Jellyfin or HomAssistant or whatever, but just a tad too lazy to setup their own Wireguard service in addition to whatever it is they’d be using it for… I think the vast majority of free tailscale users have simply never actually tried wg-easy , because if they did they wouldnt need to use a third party service.
pjusk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
Big difference in users and devices here. Tailscale might have a 3 user limit, but you can add up to 100 devices for free. So for me for example I have tailscale running in each and every docker container in my NAS. So each and every container can now act as a node on my tailnet. Users isn’t a big deal, any one node can activate funnel with a simple command and poof its available to the public. The convenience coupled with simplicity is what makes Tailscale so god damn good.
avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Can you segregate connections between different nodes on the tailnet, like say node G and H can only talk to each other and no other nodes?