4 ms·
WireGuard is nice and fast indeed, but unusable for me at work, because pretty much all outbound UDP-traffic is filtered. Having a TCP-based option sure would
by josteink 7y ago
WireGuard is nice and fast indeed, but unusable for me at work, because pretty much all outbound UDP-traffic is filtered.
Having a TCP-based option sure would be nice.
- julesallen 7y agoYes, this is a concern as as I'm testing it as a daily driver there are quite a few public networks it won't work with. For non technical end users it's a show stopper. Without TCP/IP you're back to running dual wg and ovpn services and pretty much where we are with ip4 vs. 6. One is 'better' but the other works everywhere.
- xxpor 7y agoI'd be fairly confident your work doesn't want people making random VPN tunnels from their work laptops.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- zamadatix 7y agoProbably not but nobody said it was the work laptop just at work. It'd be pretty hard to get WG installed on a work laptop in the first place. My work does the same kind of thing on the guest SSID, drives me nuts.
- RcrdBrt 7y agoI use wireguard on top of udp2raw to power through UDP-blocking firewalls all the time https://github.com/wangyu-/udp2raw-tunnel https://github.com/wangyu-/udp2raw-tunnel Added bonus: it's not TCP
- hendersoon 7y agoWhat a cool solution! Thanks for linking it.
- netflixandkill 7y agoI've had consistent success running wireguard over 443 on a wide variety of otherwise limited networks now that quic has been around a while.