| ▲ | Trufa 11 hours ago | |||||||||||||
Nice, just today, I was trying ngrok, localtunnel, and a couple more, they all were pretty slow, fair enough for the free tier, but I'm interested in knowing is there something architecturally hard or expensive with having fast traffic? I love this and will definitely try it. I would honestly love to have it with a dockerized version with something like caddy that manages ssl so I can basically just run a docker command have it up and running. Thank you very much! Great stuff will give it a try. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Ingon 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
connet [1] works in p2p fashion and is pretty quick if it can establish direct connection. Most other solutions do route through a separate node, so if your direct to node latency is low it should be comparable to directly hitting that node. It also has a docker release on ghcr. There is also a saas version [2], if you just wanna try it without running the control plane. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | punkpeye 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
You might need to define 'fast'. This should not add more latency than your average VPN, since the overhead of websocket is minimal and roundtrip time is about the same. At the moment, this is running on a single-instance with no load-balancing. The intended use case was to enable streaming of MCP SSE traffic, which is very lightweight. I would expect this to be able to handle a lot of traffic just like that, but if people start using the public instance for other use cases, I will need to think of ways to scale it. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||