-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 65
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Feature request: OpenVPN #71
Comments
I think it is an overkill feature, the nanokvm have a constant CPU utilization, openvpn on only a single core would make the stream go unstable |
Well, it never went unstable for me. But jeez, MJPEG sure eats a ton of bandwidth. A better codec would really help with latency when connecting remotely. We really need H264 on this thing... |
Just use Tailscale. Much better. |
I would not call it "much better". First of all, anything that requires me to create an account on a third party website just to manage local network resources is a showstopper for me. Wireguard network ain't rocket science to set up, you do not need any accounts for this. |
In some network environments that are not friendly to UDP, openvpn may be the best choice. |
A bit offtopic. I've also compiled SoftEther client for testing. It's an L2 VPN but is about twice as fast as OpenVPN even over TCP. Not as easy to setup though. |
It would be beneficial to have OpenVPN added to the stock distribution as it is more universally supported than Tailscale. This would add another way to access KVM devices behind NAT.
I have cross-compiled OpenVPN from source using the LicheeRV-Nano sysroot and toolchain and it runs fine. I can access the KVM through it when connected to a server.
Only needs a few extra libs installled, all of which are easy to cross-compile using the provided toolchain and sysroot.
BTW, if anyone needs OpenVPN on the NanoKVM right now, I can provide a tarball with prebuilt binaries.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: