First: I’ve tried Tailscale, for some reason it works awful for me so I’m avoiding that option if possible.
I am trying to have a single server that has a VPN port exposed to connect to it, but routes traffic through a comercial VPN (mullvad ideally) to privately share my linux ISOs. So far I haven’t been able to achieve this, it sees I can’t use the VPN server (wg-easy) + VPN (mullvad gui), only the one that start first work.
Has anybody achieve something like this?
Another option is virtualization.
Separate your sharing server from your remote access server, then have them each connect to a different VPN
This is how I do it.
I have several containers and a couple of VMs running on my one server. My router is also currently virtualized (OpnSense running in a Proxmox VM, works great) and it connects to tailscale and uses subnet routing to allow my LAN devices to be accessed from outside my home without putting them directly on the Internet.
Meanwhile, I have two more VPNs set up for two different sharing servers. All on one physical machine.
I’ve done exactly this with wg-easy so I can use my external VPN on my phone while still connecting to my home network without toggling VPNs.
My config here is for v14, you’ll want to pin the image version: https://github.com/qdm12/gluetun/discussions/1192#discussioncomment-12973135 Note there’s a small typo in the local network Down rule I added, I’m on mobile right now else I’d copy my current config instead that cleans it up a bit since this post.
In the same thread, someone posted a fantastic guide to get it working with v15. You’ll need to add an iptables rule for full LAN access if you want to enable that: https://blog.bktus.com/en/archives/2918/
V15 was giving me issues because it didn’t allow you to disable ipv6, but apparently the latest edge builds do. I haven’t tried that yet
I’ll try it as soon as I have time!
V15 didn’t work for me, might be the issue you mention, so I’ll stick with 14 for the time being.
Yeah I feel like v15 released a bit too early outside of preview builds. It’s a substantial improvement but doesn’t feel quite ready.
Maybe give Zerotier a shot. Similar premise as Tailscale, but a simplified NAT and routing implementation.
My overall question though is…why??? If you have access to a VPN, why would you connect to another location to use it when you can just use it from anywhere?
TS works better for me than ZT. I started with ZT first, and had random access issues between my android phone, my VPS, and all my local devices.
The local devices could all ping each other’s Zerotier IP addresses, but the vps and phone had issues pinging them, but not each other.
Meanwhile, tailscale is working fine, and I’ve even set up subnet routing so I only need it on my phone, my VPS, and my OpnSense system.
With Zerotier, I couldn’t get routing to work at all.
Yeah, one or the other works well depending on how your network is deployed. Example: Tailscale gets whacky when dNAT issues are present, but ZT blasts through.
Sounds like OP is having the opposite issue as you.
Two cases.
One to have my server connect to the internet without exposing my traffic.
The second is to not have to chose between be connected to my server or be connected behind a VPN.
Honestly, if if wasn’t because tailscale is performing badly for the last few months, I wouldn’t have problems using and even paying for it.
Tailscale can actually use a Mullvad exit point. I don’t know if you knew that …
Yes, but it’s working awful for me. Even without exit point lose connection for a long time, and there’s a error on the app. I need to restart the connection for it to work again.
Even when it works it’s much slower to connect to my server than VPN.
Even when it works it’s much slower to connect to my server than VPN.
I wonder why.
Wireguard / TS runs faster than VPN’s, and even my family member has had a couple of devices on my Tailnet down at their place for a couple of years now, and they haven’t a clue how it works and fully believe I’m a magician.
Any background on your connection/location/devices etc?
Location is Europe, when I lose connection it mentions the TS server and it’s in my country.
Devices mainly my server (mini PC at home, public IP, no NAT) and phone.
When trying to use subsonic of jellyfin from outside the network there’s a noticeable delay between opening the apps and actually connecting. When using WG directly it’s like being at home on the same LAN.
Main issue is that every now and then phone losses all internet connectivity, and TS shows an error connecting to it’s server.
Yeah, UK here and a couple of times I get errors about not being able to connect to the relay server in London + Amsterdam also with a public IP address from my ISP, but seem to have no issues even when it shows them unable to connect to the relay servers. The external Tailnet down at fam members house is FTTP but CG-NAT’ed, and why I love how TS works around it. Somehow.
But I have to ask. Have you setup the Tailnet with this fix for IP Forwarding on a subnet router (this helps me so much for tech support on said Tailnet…) and also UDP
https://tailscale.com/blog/quic-udp-throughput
I’m currently on my phone but I recall having to ensure the Mini PC w/Ubuntu / Pi4 with Raspbian down at their house had both the above when bringing Tailscale,
up.
I had success using openVPN. I set it up, generated certificates, installed it on my phones, tablets, and laptops.
It won’t work when using an external vpn like Express or Mulvad, but while using it, you have secure connection to home. Once done with the home network, turn off the vpn, turn on your commercial vpn.
I did follow this guide to use WireGuard to connect to my homeserver and use my internal pihole and then connect to the internet with protonVPN.
I use Zerotier. I have a rpi sharing my Linux isos through a commercial VPN. The RPI has Zerotier as well as my other devices, so I can connect to it from anywhere as if it was on my home network.
Tailscale has the funnel command which exposes services like how you describe, but that’s off the table.
Not quite sure I understand your layout, but if these are separate VPNs, you could run one from the server with a port forward (guessing that’s not through Mullvad as they don’t offer forwards any longer - to my knowledge) and then setup the general VPN on your router perhaps so you don’t have to change ip routes for the whole network. You would still probably need to setup an ip route specific to the server VPN traffic on the router at that point, but that would probably be less work.
If this all being done from the same device then you would need to separate them out by IP routes.
