311–320 of 354 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have raised before, so that money helped shape the service you enjoy.
Yes, but when they raised before they did not give up a bunch of control in return.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dynamic IP addresses typically also have a forced disconnect at a regular interval. Not really what I want to host services on.
That seems like even more reason to use an overlay - it abstracts all that instability away and gives you a consistent, secure network regardless of what the underlying IPs are doing. Obviously peers can have static IPs too if you think that makes them more stable to routing changes (it doesn't).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also DERP relays having QOS that isn't controlled by myself and I have to hope to get bandwidth through doesn't exactly make me confident about the solution
Sure, but your data is only getting relayed through DERP servers if it cant otherwise establish a direct p2p connection. This can usually be resolved at either side of the connection - if you know about it (which is what the parent was suggesting could be made more clear). As for your bandwidth concerns in the case of needing to relay, you can even set up your own relay ( https://tailscale.com/kb/1118/custom-derp-ser…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that smart? I signed up for a Microsoft Account with my email and I can use Microsoft Account to log in to Tail scale but I can't use the email directly? How does the middle man bring anything to the table?
Because then tailscale doesn’t store a username and password for you, so unless microsoft is hacked you won’t be- theoretically.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
but at the same time, now Microsoft knows you are using Tailscale (and they use this data in their tracking + analytics). And all the other products. They get a very good insight of your online habbit, because they have a list of all other products and apps you use where you sign in with your microsoft account. And due to the way token refresh works, they even have a good idea how frequently you use each individual o…
sure, then spin up a keycloak. Its not hard. If you don’t feel comfortable doing so: maybe that is telling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
sure, then spin up a keycloak. Its not hard. If you don’t feel comfortable doing so: maybe that is telling.
What are you on about. For years logging in with email was possible even on the most amateurish projects. Now that's not possible for tailscale? Why
Account issues, recovery, support that can be manipulated, a single breach or bad password that grants access to their admin interfaces, implementing their own 2FA.
And, serious people want SSO anyway, and most people have some kind of authentication they can lean on.
You can make a stodgy password login if you want, or you can run a keycloak yourself.
If you don't want to run an OIDC provider for yourself, why would you want them to?
Genuinely I applaud the idea that they're SSO first, and have as little information as possible to handle things. If you don't like it; well, run your own, run headscale - or, use wireguard another way.
Not every company needs their own login system. I fucking hate it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but when they raised before they did not give up a bunch of control in return.
One gives up a decent amount of control for the first 12m, then a bunch more at 100m. Unless you work there, you frankly have no idea how much control the founders have.
I'm a fan of TS and have been a paying customer for work infra for almost a year now. It really is well put together and easy to use, but I do run up against some issues/complaints when diving deep that I hope they can work out: * The pricing tiers and included features by tier penalizes you in frustrating ways. The base plan is a reasonable $6/user/m, but if you want to use ACLs to control anything in a workable way…
>$6/user/m, but if you want to use ACLs to control anything in a workable way, it jumps 3x to $18/u/m. It's market segmentation, needing ACLs is a sign you're at least an SMB, and to a business of nearly any actual size, the difference between $6/user and $18/user is 0.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>$6/user/m, but if you want to use ACLs to control anything in a workable way, it jumps 3x to $18/u/m. It's market segmentation, needing ACLs is a sign you're at least an SMB, and to a business of nearly any actual size, the difference between $6/user and $18/user is 0.
Um, it's 3x the cost to get one feature. By your logic they should be charging $100/user/mo for the feature since that must also be the same. This is typical "enterprise" nonsense pricing and it will absolutely drive some adopters to look elsewhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Um, it's 3x the cost to get one feature. By your logic they should be charging $100/user/mo for the feature since that must also be the same. This is typical "enterprise" nonsense pricing and it will absolutely drive some adopters to look elsewhere.
It's a perfectly valid part of a pricing strategy to drive people away if they are not the customers you want.