[warhorse10_9]

Where did you get an implication that Wireguard was US-only. The poster you are replying to is simply stating since Wireguard may still be a bit buggy, they are rolling this out in the US first to iron out any kinks before making it widely available.

[nickik]

Wireguard itself is probebly not buggy, but the problem is the whole software and infrastructure around it can absolutly be buggy. So it makes sense.

[admax88q]

But how does rolling it out US only first help with the fact that Wireguard is buggy.

They are already rolling it out slowly via a waiting list. Limiting that to US only doesn't really change how "widely available" it is in order to iron out the kinds. Seem more likely this is regulatory related.

[michaelbuckbee]

Trying to do support in multiple languages and timezones can be tricky (and surely adds to the cost), I don't know for sure if that's the reason but it's a reasonable one.

[callalex]

Let’s take the fact that they don’t have the resources to launch to every user all at one for the reasons stated in comments near this one. Do you agree with that premise? If so, what do you propose as a more ideal limited rollout strategy? First come first served? That has its own share of problems with user burnout and people feeling annoyed after being left out as well.

[warhorse10_9]

That is a very good point on it possibly being regulatory related. I agree, that is probably also a big part of it.