Windows Kills SMB Speeds When Using Tailscale • Hacker News Board

Re: Windows Kills SMB Speeds When Using Tailscale

#41

Post by stego-tech » Thu, Nov 14, 2024, 6:11 PM UTC

code_biologist wrote: post #18

stego-tech wrote: post #12

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. To be fair, I didn’t think Tailscale did a good job explaining why this isn’t a great idea last time I tinkered with it in 2022. If you can juggle SSH keys and forward ports on your firewall, you can j…

I needed access to my home NAS and linux GPU box while visiting family last year over the holidays. I was in a rush. I spent 45 minutes trying to get Wireguard configured and working, then tried Tailscale and had the network I was looking for in 15 minutes. I'm not a homelabber. I hate network admin. Is Just Works™ / being moron-resistant, with good first-party client apps, a bad reason to pick Tailscale?

Of course not - if it works, it works, and I won’t fault folks for using Tailscale (heck, I like Tailscale, but I just got Wireguard working suitably for my needs first). My gripe was more that folks use it for a virtual network on their home LAN without seemingly grasping the implications of such abstraction - kind of like how the trend during the pandemic was “everything in Kubernetes” even though VMs might have been a better fit for their given problem.

If you’re willing to put in the effort to make it work, then go for it, but I just caution folks to understand there might be better solutions to consider - and that especially when talking about abstraction layers, you absolutely need to understand the implications of said layers before deployment.

Re: Windows Kills SMB Speeds When Using Tailscale

#42

Post by stego-tech » Thu, Nov 14, 2024, 6:18 PM UTC

jauer wrote: post #19

stego-tech wrote: post #12

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. To be fair, I didn’t think Tailscale did a good job explaining why this isn’t a great idea last time I tinkered with it in 2022. If you can juggle SSH keys and forward ports on your firewall, you can j…

> 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...

This is why I (thought I) prefaced my gripe with the context of date and documentation. Looking at modern docs, yeah, it absolutely looks like it’s trying to be a Freemium alternative to something like zScaler but on top of Wireguard (virtual secure network), but the OP’s article still makes me bristle because it demonstrates the lack of knowledge of the implications of that deployment model.

Case in point is that their grievance is about SMB to their NAS being routed over Tailscale despite being on the same network as the SMB endpoints. Ideally this is something that should’ve come up during the architecture phase of deployment: how should traffic be handled when both machines share the same network? When should Tailscale’s routing table prefer the local adapter over the Tailscale adapter? If Tailscale cannot be configured to advertise a specific link speed that accurately reflects network conditions, how can we apply policies to the endpoints to route traffic correctly?

I admittedly used this article as a personal soapbox to yell at (software) folks to get out of my lane (IT), and that was a fault of mine; I should’ve taken more time to articulate the pitfalls of these sorts of rapid deployments homelabs can facilitate, and share my expertise from my field with others instead of grandstanding. That’s on me.

Re: Windows Kills SMB Speeds When Using Tailscale

#43

Post by accrual » Fri, Nov 15, 2024, 3:31 AM UTC

ygra wrote: post #35

accrual wrote: post #2

It was nice to see PowerShell could change the interface metric when the adapter GUI refused due to the empty IP field. I bet that check has been there since the 90s. It makes me a little happy when a new CLI is able to do something the old GUI cannot!

It's not just the new CLI. I guess you could have done the same with netsh for ages as well.

Nice, you're right, looks like `netsh` can do it:

    netsh interface ipv4 set interface "" metric=