51–60 of 157 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd appreciate if you could provide me a list of those buzzwords so that I can improve the readme.
“A next-gen FOSS self-hosted unified zero trust secure access platform that can operate as a remote access VPN, a ZTNA/BeyondCorp architecture, API/AI gateway, a PaaS, an infrastructure for MCP & A2A architectures or even as an ngrok-alternative and a homelab infrastructure.” Literally every single word of it
I don't trust this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you. I understand it's hard to concisely define what Octelium is because it is designed as a unified/generic secure/zero trust access platform, a term that almost nobody would relate to. It's more of a generic Kubernetes-like architecture/infrastructure for zero trust secure access that can fit many different use cases (i.e. human to workload and workload to workload environments). Well, it can be used as a typ…
Gentle feedback: if it’s hard to concisely define what Octelium is, it will be hard to convince people to use it. To me this sounds like an L7 identity & access management layer for wireguard, but again I had trouble parsing the readme.
For everyone who's having a hard time parsing what Octelium does, I found this page to be the clearest explanation: https://octelium.com/docs/octelium/latest/overview/how-octel... It's clearer because, instead of starting with a massive list of everything you could do with Octelium (which is indeed confusing), it starts by explaining the core primitives Octelium is built on, and builds up from there. And it actually…
TailScale is wonderful but they do need competition. I imagine an IPO is on the horizon, and as soon as they enter that phase, nasty price increases are sure to follow unless someone else is nipping hard at their heels.
Just some feedback to share some problems I personally think you’re going to have and why I suspect you’ll face a healthy amount of skepticism. There is a lack of history of development that ends with a major initial commit of unknown origin, a lack of any public information, a company that does not appear (publicly) to exist, and a product that is going to solve every need that can be imagined by packing it with buz…
> If a software is hard to explain the purpose of to an average person in a single sentence, you have an uphill battle.
It does. If you use tailscale/cloudflare access and ngrok, the product is pretty well described. If you don't, then probably you don't need this product.
Definitely interested in an open source alternative to Tailscale. The README is way too verbose though. It should explain the project at a glance and have links to docs for the details.
headscale is an open source alternative to tailscale: https://github.com/juanfont/headscale
Earlier quoted context omitted.
headscale is an open source alternative to tailscale: https://github.com/juanfont/headscale
Headscale is great (I use it) but it is an alternative to the Tailscale control server, not the client applications. Some of those are closed source, and their compatibility with Headscale is not guaranteed.
https://tailscale.com/opensource: "The core client code for the Tailscale daemon used across all platforms is open source, and the full client code is open source for platforms that are also open source."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think "no buzzwords" would be further in the direction of: "This software let's you set up peer to peer networking between your devices, expose them to the internet, run applications on them, view useful runtime information, and integrate easily with cloud providers and infrastructure you're familiar with."
Thank you. Octelium, however, does not operate as p2p and does not directly connect devices since that by itself contradicts the whole point of zero trust. It provides remote access to resources, or even sub-resources via L7 access control (e.g. allow access to some HTTP paths to some users based on identity/context/request content, etc...), not completely to "devices" or to complete subnets.
How does it compare to Pangolin?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you. Octelium, however, does not operate as p2p and does not directly connect devices since that by itself contradicts the whole point of zero trust. It provides remote access to resources, or even sub-resources via L7 access control (e.g. allow access to some HTTP paths to some users based on identity/context/request content, etc...), not completely to "devices" or to complete subnets.
How about: “Octelium is a secure, policy-based access gateway to your HTTP services, with both VPN tunnel-based and OAuth/zero-trust modes available. (And it can do a lot more!)”