[freedomben]

Tailscale is far, far less work to set up and maintain. Not to use a cliche, but it reminds me of Dropbox vs. rsync.

If you know Wireguard well enough to set up your own and you're willing, you'll have a lot more control and less dependency, which is a win IMHO. But if you are limited by time and/or knowledge, Tailscale is great

[darkwater]

Aren't we talking about self-hosting, tinkering with your software for fun and hobby instead of going the SaaS way? Arguing about WG instead of TS in this context is perfectly fine

[freedomben]

Indeed, if you got the impression from my comment that I didn't think a debate on WG vs. TS was fine, then I apologize. I think it's a great (and important) thing to debate. My opinion is as stated. I think it's a different cost-benefit analysis for each person depending on time and/or knowledge.

[darkwater]

Don't worry!

Staying on the topic, I wonder how easy/complicated is to self-host Head scale, which is the opensource implementation of the TS server.

[al_borland]

Some people want the control without it becoming a full time hobby.

I wanted a NAS. I could do it with Linux and ZFS, rolling my own with full control. However, I didn’t want to sink that much time into it, and figured when something needed to be done, I would have forgotten so much I’d need to relearn over and over again.

Instead I went with a Synology. I get my NAS, I’m in control of my data, I can run some stuff with Docker on it… but I don’t really have to spend any time playing sys admin on my weekends.

[aae42]

i self-host TS (headscale), so maybe not mutually exclusive

[pxc]

Wireguard is very easy to set up imo.

Tailscale adds a lot of conveniences on top of Wireguard, though. I don't think most of their value comes from just eliminating the key management stuff from Wireguard setup.