Tailscale is built to be global to your device, while iroh is built to be embedded into each application. This allows application developers and users a much more fine grained and bespoke setup, than having a single global bridge.

▲

kkapelon 6 hours ago | parent [-]

you can embed tailscale on the application level https://tailscale.com/docs/features/tsnet

▲

nemothekid 5 hours ago | parent [-]

This isn't the same functionality - if I'm shipping a video conferencing application, tsnet would require all my customers be in my tailnet.

▲

kkapelon 5 hours ago | parent [-]

but if I am shipping a video conferencing application (where I control both the client and the server) I don't need nat traversal anymore. My clients will have outgoing connections to whichever co-ordination server I choose.

Tailscale is great for bringing devices/apps into a secure network when I cannot modify them in any way. If I have full access to the source code for everything, the story changes completely.

	▲	nemothekid an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		>My clients will have outgoing connections to whichever co-ordination server I choose. Then it's no longer p2p? If I wanted to avoid paying cloud egress costs, then I would need a p2p solution. >Tailscale is great for bringing devices/apps into a secure network when I cannot modify them in any way. If I have full access to the source code for everything, the story changes completely. Naturally, but this thread isn't about Tailscale, its about Iroh. You were the one that claimed Tailscale can already do what Iroh can. But I've pointed out a usecase where Tailscale wouldn't suffice that Iroh can accomplish.
	▲	ranguna 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		What if you build a p2p video conferencing app with user controlled co-ordinator "server". Server in quotes, because maybe iroh works through the browser?