data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9f087/9f087015694247dfbeb8874ce3af8297572ca693" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cc31d/cc31d379626adc5b64b51b39efaec0be8eb950e8" alt=""
1·
1 year agoI think you have a misunderstanding about wireguard clients.
As long as the server isn’t behind a cgnat, a connection from the client to the server can be made. It does not matter if the client is behind a cgnat or not. If that were true, privacy vpns like proton and mullvad would not work.
That said, tailscale is easy to setup compared to a wireguard tunnel, but wireguard has potentially more performance because tailscale uses wireguard-go rather than wireguard kernel.
I believe performance is situationally dependent, so it may or may not be faster, but it theoretically is. I personally choose wireguard over tailscale because it’s one less 3rd party involved, not for potential performance increases.