Tailscale - Pay as You Go

My main use case for Tailscale is for my homelab, where I have several services, including professional services. I use it to connect remotely from different places and access my services. I used to work from two different homes, where all the infrastructure was in the first home, but I was in the second home, so I was always connecting to the first home. I actually did that internationally, across two different continents, and it worked very well. The first use is to connect to the infrastructure, to be able to manage it, and to be able to administer it. I also used Wake on LAN for different devices through Tailscale network. That was a very good use case.

Additionally, since I have it, I use it on public networks when I want anonymity, for example, in an airport. I forward all the traffic from my mobile device through Tailscale network to the other home, and there I can have all my information encrypted in the airport.

I have many devices that use Tailscale, including many non-technical users who need to connect to the infrastructure to obtain certain files and make certain changes. Tailscale app, especially for iPhone, works very well. It is very easy to turn on and off, and it is very easy to do all the setup. Comparing it directly with WireGuard, with WireGuard, I have to create each of the peers and each of the configuration files for each of the devices. On top of that, for the server that I was using with Tailscale service, several peer files were needed because one redirected all the internet traffic and the other only to the services that were needed, depending on what I wanted to do at that time. I had to create two peers for each of the devices, and it was honestly a lot of hassle to manage. With Tailscale, it is really very easy to configure it, add the emails of all these people within the main console, and that allowed non-technical users to use the entire infrastructure by connecting, either forwarding all internet traffic through Tailscale or only forwarding the specific traffic of the services.

Another good thing about Tailscale is that since it runs on top of WireGuard, I really notice very few performance differences. The performance is quite good, and the stability as well, because I have used it to send many gigabytes of data over the internet, in fact, across continents, from one continent to another, using the entire Tailscale network. I used the SMB service to share files, and I am sometimes talking about transferring 50, 70, or 80 GB all through the VPN. It worked super well. Having firewall passthrough directly passes NAT passthrough. That is much easier to configure than configuring all the ports. Everything updates automatically, which is also very helpful. I actually have it with auto-update both on the server and on all users. That also greatly improves the overall experience. I haven't had any major problems, and the fact that anyone can use it is very good.

It is positive because in a very easy way all users can connect, they can see files, they can access certain services, and I can privately manage all the infrastructure while being on different continents.

I haven't used Tailscale in corporate terms, but I know it has many features that I am currently not using. The fact that the UI and UX are so good, that it works so well, that it is clear, and this Exit Node feature that can be activated in a very easy way, allowing me to access all the infrastructure, makes it very easy to use. That is a good advantage.

This allowed less technical users to use all my infrastructure, which before was more complicated. Before, I spent a lot of time setting up all the peers, and now I disabled all the peers I had in WireGuard and I rely simply on Tailscale. At most, I just add the Gmail accounts. Something very good they added is that before I wanted to have an account where I could log in with my own email in Tailscale, and I couldn't. I had to log in with Google and Gmail, which actually bothered me quite a bit. That was pretty bad because I don't use Gmail as my primary account. I have Gmail as a second or third account, but there was no provider for the email I used, which is ProtonMail. I know that now you can create an account. I've never done it and I kept the Gmail account that I only use for Tailscale and very few other things.

This is also worth mentioning because it provides simplicity and flexibility in user management, which is essential for less technically inclined individuals.

At the moment, I don't know because it's been working very well for me, and I haven't been managing it much lately. I still use it because I connect from different phones, but everything is already configured, and I simply use it as a tool. For my use case, it works perfectly.

One somewhat negative point that I see is that if you want to use Exit Node and that is installed on a device within the network, then you have a bit more latency because instead of the packets going from a mobile device to the router at the other home and from the router going out again to the internet, for example, now they have to enter the network, enter the device that has Tailscale, and only then go out. That sometimes adds about 3 milliseconds. This is crucial if you are sending many gigs. If there were a feature, it would be great if Tailscale could integrate with different providers in routers or commercial devices. They would have to negotiate, and I know it's not easy, but so that the router itself or a piece of equipment that is at the edge of a network could have Tailscale installed and run from there. With that, you can reduce a few milliseconds, and you also wouldn't be overloading the internal network or the switches at the other home. That is an important point to take into account.

I have been using Tailscale for approximately two years.

I consider Tailscale to be stable.

I cannot answer that because I don't have very scalable, very large environments. They are small environments.

I used L2TP and OpenVPN before Tailscale, and then I started deploying Tailscale and WireGuard. At first, WireGuard was hard for me. It was difficult to install, and due to time, I didn't do it. I deployed it later and I still have it partially, but I primarily use Tailscale because it runs on top of WireGuard, it is more efficient than L2TP, and more efficient than OpenVPN, and installation is super easy.

I experienced reduced technical effort and implementation time since using Tailscale.

I have not had any problems with Tailscale's costs, initial setup, and licensing. I did not incur any costs and I stay entirely on the free tier. I don't think I had any licensing issues either. I haven't hit any limits yet, and I would have to check which features are paid, but for now, the free ones work very well for me.

When I learned about Tailscale, it was recommended to me, and I investigated it, saw that it was very good, and started using it.

There are several or many minutes of time saved, especially with WireGuard and in management, and in the mental management, it also has an impact because having to manage so many peer files with WireGuard was a bit more complex. With Tailscale, it is honestly super easy. A friend had recommended it to me, so all of that is very good.

In fact, I did something very important, which is that I conducted a comparison study for my university thesis where I specifically compared four VPN services. I compared L2TP, OpenVPN, Tailscale, and WireGuard. The tests I did in the benchmark were on two different continents, in Europe and Latin America. I tested it with the transfer of a 500 MB file over the internet using the Windows SMB protocol, wanting to see the overhead between each of the different VPN services. Speaking of L2TP, it completed the transfer in 1 minute and 10 seconds. Then OpenVPN had a slightly better performance than L2TP with 1 minute and 7 seconds. Then comes Tailscale with 1 minute and 6 seconds and finally WireGuard, which was the fastest at 1 minute and 5 seconds. Although WireGuard technically won in speed, it is not worth that one second of difference in transfer time versus the fact that it is actually much faster to deploy the VPN and the infrastructure with Tailscale. I much prefer Tailscale over WireGuard for that reason.

I always recommend to others who are considering using Tailscale to go for it.

My main use case for Tailscale is connecting me to my home lab, which serves as my front-end infrastructure, whereas I use ZeroTier for back-end infrastructure for connecting things such as IOT devices and personal servers.

A specific example of how I use Tailscale with my home lab is that it allows me to easily provide secure access from myself to my home lab while on the go. This does more than just connect me with my servers; it allows me to run all of my internet traffic on my devices while on the go through my router as the exit node, which allows me to use AdGuard as my DNS server and my home firewall. Overall, it makes me more secure on the go and prevents me from often having to use HTTPS on many of my personal services because Tailscale encrypts traffic already, making HTTPS sort of irrelevant in that specific use case.

The best features Tailscale offers are its encrypted tunnel and easy setup VPN, which are common across your space. I personally love two specific things that differentiate Tailscale: the automatic HTTPS setup, which means you don't have to deal with certificates or anything similar, and the ability to use exit nodes very easily, which is a super useful feature.

The automatic HTTPS setup and easy node management have helped me in my daily workflow because I have an automation on my iPhone that runs as soon as I disconnect from my home network, allowing me to tunnel my cellular data through Tailscale back to my home lab and run my router as an exit node. This means I can use AdGuard for my DNS to block anything from malware to ads in general. The HTTPS setup is super useful for another use case I had where I was building an AI German teacher for myself, allowing communication to happen because most browsers require HTTPS for such connections. Not having to set up certificates and simply using the Magic DNS URL with HTTPS on the Tailscale side was super time-saving and useful.

Tailscale positively impacts my organization because I can feel incredibly secure on the go without worrying about opening ports on any routers. It makes an incredible amount of sense for my use, and I wish I could use it more in my role at ADP, though they generally manage that externally through Cisco. But I give my sign-off to advertise to them.

The only improvement I see for Tailscale is that I would love to check out Headscale to fully host it on my own infrastructure. However, I think it is a really great product as is. It is easy to set up, and since it uses WireGuard on the back end, it is quite fast. I would love to see a diagram that gives me clearer visibility into how I connect to each node, as I often find I connect to non-direct routes to individual servers, and a visual representation of that would make it easier to visualize.

I have been using Tailscale for about five years.

Tailscale is stable most of the time, as I occasionally see dropouts. However, I appreciate receiving notifications about drops, which I almost never notice myself. Occasionally, I see on my router that the exit node has gone dark, but I don't notice that in practice.

Tailscale's scalability is very good, with the visibility and ability to access metrics making it easy to scale upward, although I have limited experience with that as I have under 100 devices, around 20.

I have never had to use customer support because the product is that good.

I previously used ZeroTier for my back-end services, and I think that is the number one one-to-one competitor within your space. I switched from ZeroTier to Tailscale for two reasons: it was much easier to set up Tailscale, and while ZeroTier still has value, Tailscale makes more sense for the speed, visibility, and overall functionality, especially with exit nodes being easier to use.

Tailscale is incredibly easy to use, and I will always sing its praises. It has made my life a lot easier. I was originally an early adopter of ZeroTier and championed that for a long while. Only in the past couple of years have I switched over to Tailscale, and it has been world-changing, making many things easier to achieve the security I was looking for on the go.

I generally work within a free tier, as there is no reason for me to step outside of that currently.

Tailscale has definitely made it so I don't have to incur additional costs. The ability to use your servers as relay servers instead of setting up my own Headscale server is the primary reason I haven't done so far, because it makes things easy and time-saving.

Before choosing Tailscale, I evaluated ZeroTier again. The only reason I haven't moved my entire infrastructure to Tailscale is cost. I can utilize free accounts on both Tailscale and ZeroTier, allowing me to build a back-end infrastructure for my family without paying for an entire organization account. ZeroTier operates on a device-based quota, while Tailscale uses an account-based quota.

A specific example of how I use Tailscale with my home lab is that it allows me to easily provide secure access from myself to my home lab on the go. This does more than just connect me with my servers; it allows me to run all of my internet traffic on my devices on the go through my router as the exit node, which allows me to use AdGuard as my DNS server and my home firewall. Overall, it makes me more secure on the go and prevents me from often having to use HTTPS on many of my personal services because Tailscale encrypts traffic already, making HTTPS sort of irrelevant in that specific use case. I would rate this product a 10 out of 10.

I use Tailscale to connect to my home server for various tasks, such as checking its status and streaming movies or series from my media server. I also use it to monitor my home surveillance system and collaborate on projects with friends.

Recently, when my server encountered an issue while I was away from home, Tailscale made it incredibly easy to connect remotely, diagnose the problem, and fix it.

Currently, I use Tailscale for a small group of three to five people, and it works flawlessly. It handles our current setup perfectly, though expanding the user limit on the free tier would be a fantastic improvement

One of Tailscale's most valuable attributes is its incredibly straightforward setup. The absolute best feature for me is that it completely eliminates the need for port forwarding on my router, which simplifies network management significantly. The platform is also highly stable; I have been using it for a while now, and it has worked flawlessly.

I have also relied heavily on Tailscale’s official documentation for advanced configurations. For instance, it helped me easily understand and set up Tailscale Funnel , which allows me to share local services over the internet securely without exposing unnecessary network data.

Additionally, when I needed to create specific access rules  (ACLs) to restrict which ports my three devices could access, the documentation guided me seamlessly through the configuration. Overall, I am incredibly impressed with their documentation; it is exceptionally detailed, informative, and user-friendly.

I would love to see two specific improvements brought to the Tailscale Android client, both of which are standard in several other VPN applications:

• The app currently lacks the ability to automatically disable the VPN when connected to a specific, trusted network (like a home Wi-Fi network). Having an automated toggle for this would prevent local traffic and local DNS queries from unnecessarily routing through the tailnet when you are already home.
• The current split-tunneling feature only allows you to exclude apps from the VPN. Because of this exclusive-only design, every newly installed app on the device defaults to routing through Tailscale. Introducing an "include" mode, where users can select only a few specific apps to use the VPN while leaving the rest to use the regular internet, would be a massive quality-of-life upgrade.

I have been using Tailscale for a little over a year.

Tailscale has been exceptionally stable. Throughout my entire time using the platform, I have personally experienced zero outages or downtime.

Because Tailscale orchestrates a peer-to-peer mesh network, my devices connect directly to one another. This architectural design provides massive peace of mind: once the initial connection is established, the data path doesn't rely on central infrastructure. Even if Tailscale's control plane faces minor maintenance or a brief degradation, my existing device links remain perfectly active and unaffected. For my home server, media streams, and surveillance setup, the reliability has been rock-solid.

I have not had any direct interactions with Tailscale's technical support team. Because the product is so stable and the official documentation is incredibly detailed, I have been able to handle everything on my own without running into any issues that required escalation.

Prior to adopting Tailscale, I was using a standard WireGuard setup over an IPv6 connection. However, because my home network sits behind Carrier-Grade NAT (CGNAT), I was entirely dependent on IPv6 to bypass it. This meant I couldn't access my VPN whenever I was on an external network that lacked IPv6 support—which, unfortunately, is still quite common. I ultimately switched to Tailscale because its native NAT traversal handles these environments seamlessly, providing the highly reliable, user-friendly, and maintenance-free alternative I needed.

The initial setup is exceptionally straightforward. On my home server, I deploy Tailscale inside a Docker container using their publicly available templates, which makes it virtually a copy-paste deployment. For my client machines, the process is as simple as downloading the application, logging into my account, and letting the devices connect automatically. The entire onboarding experience is frictionless.

Before choosing Tailscale, I evaluated a few other mesh VPN options, most notably Netbird.

• Pros: Netbird is a very capable, open-source product with a great user interface and a solid architecture.
• Cons: In my testing, Netbird simply wasn't fast enough for my requirements. I noticed a distinct difference in throughput and connection establishment speeds compared to Tailscale.

Ultimately, Tailscale won out because it offered superior performance, lower latency, and a much more mature ecosystem for my specific routing needs.