headscale VS wg-access-server

Headscale

You can always use headscale. https://github.com/juanfont/headscale

One more thing, you can host Tailscale Control Server yourself if you want, which is a plus.

https://github.com/juanfont/headscale not to mention but Tailscale has a very good culture, I’m sure they would give notice if they pull the rug. There are also many alternatives such as Zerotier and more are showing up every day and open source options.

How about self-hosted Tailscale, known as Headscale

Would be nice if https://github.com/juanfont/headscale can be managed by the Tailscale operator.

You can run your own "head scale" control server and use their clients with it: https://github.com/juanfont/headscale

Requires a lot more setup, but it is an option. I've been self-hosting headscale for some time and it is quite stable.

There's an alternative to tailscale service called headscale https://github.com/juanfont/headscale (CLI only server compatible with official tailscale clients)

It isn't official, but headscale exists: https://github.com/juanfont/headscale

I tried them all. I settled on wg-access-server.

Yes, at my startup we run https://github.com/Place1/wg-access-server inside our kubernetes clusters to give engineers access to local pods vs the k8s DNS (.svc.cluster.local). It works relatively well but we've had to make a couple modifications:

1. I had to deploy CoreDNS to our cluster and set up DNS query rewriting to redirect queries from .cluster.mystartup to *.svc.cluster.local because docker on OS X has issues resolving hostnames that end in .local

What is the difference from https://github.com/Place1/wg-access-server ?

Not sure why this is downvoted. I use a similar service that runs in docker just fine. https://github.com/Place1/wg-access-server