Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by 3np 1942 days ago
I've looked at Tailscale before, but I thought it was just a managed WG architecture?

It's more the routing that is the issue which, unless I'm mistaken, falls out of scope for Tailscale (assuming one already has the VPN part sorted).
1 comments
ignoramous 1942 days ago
Tailscale fixes the Internet [0]: It makes it private, secure, and seamless. And because of that, one could do a lot on top of those basic uncompromising guarantees, like build a private, roaming, cross-platform P2P network, for example.

https://tailscale.com/blog/sharing-over-tailscale/

[0] Well, they aren't an ISP yet, but I wouldn't put it past them because of the founding team's previous experience leading Google Fiber.

link
3np 1942 days ago
I still don't see it. The link you shared is for creating ad-hoc tunnels with provisioned trusted parties.

I want to have incoming and outgoing UDP from a particular process/container reachable externally, but routed through a different peer. Maybe I wasn't clear, but I'm talking about public, unathenticated and untrusted P2P networks.

I've looksed over their repos and documentation and see nothing (apart from general "anything is possible" marketing handwaving) indicating it's less work than on any other topology/protocol.

link
ignoramous 1938 days ago
I don't quite get your usecase, but you may be looking for their "exit node" feature which just landed in the CLI (yet to be supported across their UIs)?

https://github.com/tailscale/tailscale/issues/1401

link
3np 1937 days ago
No, that's not it.

If you read the parent issue to what you're posting (which is also not exactly what I'm asking for, I need something more granular wrt routing), you can see clearly from the discussion that this is completely orthogonal to what Tailscale is aiming to achieve.

https://github.com/tailscale/tailscale/issues/102

link