3 ms·
This is cool, although tbh my biggest challenge with Wireguard is that I'd really like to be able to run Tailscale and another VPN at the same time. Another tr
by jchw 4y ago
This is cool, although tbh my biggest challenge with Wireguard is that I'd really like to be able to run Tailscale and another VPN at the same time.
Another trick: if you are using Firefox with Multi-account container tabs, you can use a Wireguard client that exposes a SOCKS5 interface (like Wireproxy) and use setup your tabs to use different Wireguard connections. You could even use this in addition to split tunnelling.
- brndnbuilds 4y agoI think things could get pretty messy running TailScale and another VPN at the same time. I suppose you could do it with IP ranges but process level split tunneling... that needs some thought on what is happening there. Maybe Vadim will have some thoughts on that later. That is a cool trick. Can you actually define which Firefox tabs use the proxy? Does it highlight the tab in some way to show you which connection you're on?
- jchw 4y agoYeah, with Firefox container tabs you can create new tabs on a given profile, and with the Multi-account extension those profiles can each be associated with a proxy. Profiles themselves have a color associated that shows up on the tab. So tabs in the same window can use different proxies.
- brndnbuilds 4y agoTIL! Thanks for the explanation
- chaxor 4y agoI haven't used tail scale, but I'm confused. I thought wireguard had a simple config where you can just place a range of IPs and it basically just sends anything to those IPs over wg - effectively split tunneling. So why couldn't you just have a different range for another subnet? Is it just because tail scale made everything needlessly complex? Or is it a base wireguard problem?
- jchw 4y agoTailscale isn't Wireguard, it uses Wireguard under the hood but it doesn't do what wireguard does.