21–30 of 43 posts
What oddly coincidental timing ... I finished setup of Tailscale just yesterday and ran into this exact issue when testing it. I didn't think too much of it and blamed the USB connection I'm using to connect my external drive.
Yes, turns out running overlay/VPN type things disrupts traffic patterns. This is a non-story.
But we're talking about using wireguard on a local network, so the actual interesting question is: why does it cause the performance to plummet? Is it an implementation issue or something more fundamental?
I expect some performance impact. I don't expect a three orders of magnitude impact (which is what 355 KB/s imputes).
I don’t think this is exclusive to Windows. SMB is a crappy service for anything outside local LAN. I am not too familiar with Tailscale but from what I understand, it’s basically akin to a VPN.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Because, for whatever reason I’ve yet to grasp, homelab folks like to implement Tailscale as some sort of “secure virtual network” abstraction layer - think something similar to zScaler ZPA - on top of their local LAN. This is Tailscale's intended behavior, not a matter of how homelab folks like to implement it: https://github.com/tailscale/tailscale/issues/659#issuecomme...
Maybe I'm not understanding properly, but why can't my device ARP ping and handshake with the subnet router to determine that I'm on the local subnet and to stop routing it through Tailscale?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Because, for whatever reason I’ve yet to grasp, homelab folks like to implement Tailscale as some sort of “secure virtual network” abstraction layer - think something similar to zScaler ZPA - on top of their local LAN. This is Tailscale's intended behavior, not a matter of how homelab folks like to implement it: https://github.com/tailscale/tailscale/issues/659#issuecomme...
Maybe I'm not understanding properly, but why can't my device ARP ping and handshake with the subnet router to determine that I'm on the local subnet and to stop routing it through Tailscale?
I don’t think this is exclusive to Windows. SMB is a crappy service for anything outside local LAN. I am not too familiar with Tailscale but from what I understand, it’s basically akin to a VPN.
I don’t think this is exclusive to Windows. SMB is a crappy service for anything outside local LAN. I am not too familiar with Tailscale but from what I understand, it’s basically akin to a VPN.
Thanks for your contribution
If Tailscale is being used for remote access to the author's LAN, why is it running on a desktop that's always physically connected to the LAN? I have a similar setup for remote access but using Wireguard instead; my main router (pfSense VM running on Proxmox like the author's thing) handles the tunnels and routing for the remote subnet(s), and it all Just Works. Only the devices that actually get used remotely need…
Tailscale has a few nice additional features as well, like automatic DNS assignment for hosts on the virtual network, generation of HTTPS certificates for those hosts, and, if you enable the right middleware in your locally run services, transparent authentication to web servers for computers on the network. If you're going all-in on Tailscale, you can use it to automate a lot of network management. That would require you to run Tailscale on all of your devices, though.
I don’t think this is exclusive to Windows. SMB is a crappy service for anything outside local LAN. I am not too familiar with Tailscale but from what I understand, it’s basically akin to a VPN.
Article spoiler: the issue is Tailscale. SMB and Windows are red herrings.
I feel like this whole thing buries the lede a bit. Yes, turns out running overlay/VPN type things disrupts traffic patterns. This is a non-story. But we're talking about using wireguard on a local network, so the actual interesting question is: why does it cause the performance to plummet? Is it an implementation issue or something more fundamental? I expect some performance impact. I don't expect a three orders of…