Trayscale, a nice little GUI for Tailscale
github.com
If you're not familiar with Tailscale it's a very user-friendly "overlay network" that lets you securely connect all your devices no matter where they are over the internet.
No need to forward ports on your router to access your home network anymore. And no need to set up VPNs manually either. Just install Tailscale on all your devices and log in with Gmail or other providers.
Tailscale has official apps for Windows, Mac Android and iOS.
Thanks to a project called Trayscale we now have a GUI app for managing Tailscale on GNU/Linux as well.
Although I use Tailscale, the control servers are closed source. For those of you who like self hosting though, there is a project called Headscale that implements them anyways https://github.com/juanfont/headscale
Quite important detail. Ty for the info
But you need to pay for a VPS to use Headscale behind NAT. If you're already paying for VPS it makes sense to use Headscale. But if you don't then you have to consider the price of a VPS vs Tailscale's free plan. Even if Tailscale eliminates that free plan, as long as they keep it around $4/mo they will still be a better option than a cheap VPS – assuming, again, that you don't have a VPS and the only reason you'd get one is for this purpose.
That's a complicated way to say:
Both comes at a cost, generally, but free options are available depending on your needs.
I'm using Tailscale Status Gnome extension which works pretty well. But good to see alternatives that is not tied to specific DE.
Is it that hard to setup Wireguard or OpenVPN? The popularity of this here perplexes me.
it's a mesh network built on wireguard. it's not just a direct connection to another PC on your network. you can select exit node devices on the fly and control acl's and access based on groups in their admin panel.
and yes, if you want a properly secured vpn setup without the necessary background knowledge, it's pretty difficult. there is no opening ports on your router, which is especially useful for people on cgnat.
TLDR: Unequivocally yes.
I've managed to eventually establish a two-point OpenVPN link after reading a lot and fiddling with two dozen settings in both the server and client. I can now generate keys for clients, wrap them into .ovpn files and can get people connected to my server.
However:
If you think that's hairy, I hear that WireGuard is even more complicated to set up than OpenVPN.
With Tailscale I install one thing on each device and run one command (or tap a checkbox on Android/iOS). It gives me a link to open, to enroll that device. And that's it. It works.
Not only does it work but it comes out of the box with:
Edit: Yes I know I can use Headscale on a VPS to achieve something very similar to Tailscale. Leaving aside the need for VPS, and while I'm thankful that WireGuard exists and that Headscale is keeping Tailscale honest, and while fully acknowledging my hypocrisy, I'm still going to be a cheap lazy asshole and use Tailscale and get a free ride until Tailscale starts charging. At which point I will weigh their offer against the cheapest VPS out there and either keep using Tailscale or start using Headscale unapologetically while eating crow from all the people shouting "told you so!". Or maybe I'll get a CCNA and finish setting up OpenVPN, we'll see.
I don't know where you heard that. The exact opposite is true in my experience. OpenVPN is a shitshow compared to Wireguard.
FWIW OpenVPN can use DNS names so you can use DDNS.
Point taken on the rest though. Everything you mentioned IS possible but the point that it's beyond most hobbyists is valid. I'm really wary of relying on a centrally managed pay service that is 'free' (for now).
CGNAT says no.
:shrug:, never had to deal with it
You will have to at some point; whether you want to or not. CGNAT is the future of IPv4.
May IPv4 just die.
It's dead already. Problem is that in the year of the lord 2023 ipv6 still isn't really a thing yet, so IPv4 remains on life support.
If you're already using IPv6 for everything, you don't need to care about CGNAT in IPv4. I highly doubt that's the case however.
Way too much effort when you can accomplish the exact same thing extremely easy and fast and more user-friendly with tailscale