ziti-doc VS innernet

OpenZiti vs BoringProxy has some similarities for sure. The simplest OpenZiti deployment is similar to a boring proxy deployment. The main differences will be that the listening ports "on the network" are going to be from the OpenZiti edge-router which will authenticate before allowing any connection using a strong x509 identity (not a token) and then after that the same identity can be authorized to access one or more services. That's one killer difference to me. There are lots of other things OpenZiti is doing that boringproxy isn't trying to as well. I filed an issue to do a comparison to that some day https://github.com/openziti/ziti-doc/issues/176 thanks for the idea! :)

Use our open source solution, OpenZiti, and host/manage it all yourself - https://openziti.github.io/

You can definitely read more about what OpenZiti is over on the docs page if you're looking for more info about the project https://openziti.github.io/

If you're interested in it, you can find it over at github - https://openziti.github.io. It's one more thing to setup and maintain so maybe that's a dealbreaker but since this is selfhosted - maybe not ;)

If you want to go fully open source and self-hosted, use an OpenZiti quickstart - https://openziti.github.io/ - while ignoring steps 1, 2, 3, and 5 ... i.e., step 4 is where you deploy an OpenZiti tunneler on an OpenWRT box.

I not long ago discovered OpenZiti, and to be honest I fell in love with it. I also have a dinamic IP, and I have even some other cases wheren from my place some IoT devices need to find my laptop wherever I may go (I travel a lot).

https://openziti.github.io/ - gives a good intro

More details: What I'm trying to do is setup a Zero Trust Host Access on my Kubernetes cluster using OpenZiti. Ziti has 4 binaries (controller, router, tunneler and admin console), configuring all these to work together is kinda complex, that's why I thought about making custom modules.

Probably overkill for your need, but you can give access to your VM without requiring a bastion or VPN, only outbound ports on a NAT gateway using opensource OpenZiti - https://openziti.github.io/. The user would load a client on their device and get access only the the specific resources you define (IP, DNS, port etc). This also means you don't need to assign the IP of the users home (added benefit they can access when not at home).

Create the identity for the Hosting workstation. You can assign as many attributes as you want. Openziti works with an "attribute-enabled role-based access control (ARBAC) model. So, if you have used hashtags, you’re probably familiarized with it.

Innernet is a barebone alternative. https://github.com/tonarino/innernet

Very relatable! At first, I struggled for days trying to make Netmaker or Innernet functional for my personal home server (Raspberry Pi behind multiple routers). But then I stumbled upon ZeroTier, and everything worked seamlessly within a couple of hours. Tailscale was actually the next one on my list because I heard many positive things about it over at r/selfhosted (especially about headscale). However, I did not end up testing it after ZeroTier worked.

Not if you are running wireguard without any management client/server like Netmaker or innernet or any of the many others like them.

I use the GCP free instance as my innernet coordination server (Wireguard mesh vpn). Which is extremely low traffic.

Or why not the open source tool innernet? https://github.com/tonarino/innernet

I wonder if this might improve over a more modern transport, if you were using an IPSec VPN.

Wireguard is enabling us to re-think what's possible over a VPN. Here's an example of what I mean. The network stack is based on Wireguard, with https://github.com/tonarino/innernet providing the topology and identity provisioning.

Virtual Private Network: Innernet, MASQ