3 ms·
Mostly speed, a more minimal configuration syntax, more modern crypto. OpenVPN works fine, is quite portable and runs in user space. It's quite a lot slower, b
by phaer 8y ago
Mostly speed, a more minimal configuration syntax, more modern crypto.
OpenVPN works fine, is quite portable and runs in user space. It's quite a lot slower, but is well-tested and can be managed with a Certificate Authority in organisation where that's desired.
- cm2187 8y agoI presume speed on linux? Otherwise doesn't wireguard suffer from the same peformance drawback than OpenVPN on windows (running in user mode)?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- Hello71 8y agoOpenVPN is quite configurable, not as much as IPsec, but still a lot, and (from what I hear) has quite a bit of code bloat. I believe that userspace WireGuard has better performance than OpenVPN.
- cm2187 8y agoMy understanding (and experience) is that OpenVPN on windows is structurally capped at about 5-10 MB/s. I was curious of how that compares to WireGuard.
- neilalexander 8y agoPerformance issues with OpenVPN on Windows arise out of the inefficiencies of the TUN/TAP driver, not the OpenVPN software itself.
- cm2187 8y agoI am sure that's true, but unless there is an alternative driver I am not sure why that makes a difference.