Feedback on Tailscale implementation, v4.2 firmware

Does the system reboot when this happened?

No… the system never rebooted itself…but the internet does come back when i shut down Tailscale on the web GUI …Also, FYI…I was able in the beginning after I updated the firmware to stream video also with Tailscale running (this is to one of my Tailscale subnet sites) in addition to my file uploading and downloading…then this issue came about…like I mentioned I tried with all the different versions of the firmware with Tailscale enabled but all end up with the same issue

Hi there,
I have the Brume GL-MT2500 router and I have issues connecting to Tailscale.
I followed all the instruction here, but still not working

things I done:

  1. setup tailscale using GL inet GUI
  2. Added the tailscale0 interface, firewall and NAT rules in LUCI UI
  3. tried to launch the sudo tailscale up --advertise-routes= --accept-routes command from ssh, but I still can’t reach any tailscale device with its IP

Firmware: 4.2.1 updated today
Any idea?

1 Like

Hi, I’ve manage to get Tailscale somewhat function after tinkering with many setting, but the service seems to constantly disconnect and reconnect on my A1300. Is there something I can do to fix this. I bought the router specifically to use with Tailscale.

My case:

  • Router: GL-AXT1800
  • OpenWRT version: OpenWrt 21.02-SNAPSHOT r16399+159-c67509efd7
  • Kernel Version: 4.4.60

Tailscale installed, added tailscale0 interface, firewall and NAT rules in LUCI
I have the same issue that has @lextar but I solved using this CLI command

tailscale set --advertise-routes=xx.xx.xx.xx/24
tailscale set --accept-routes
tailscale up

Then I can reach any other tailscale device.
But, If I reboot the router I loss the config and I need to make again the sames changes.

On my non-standard install of tailscale on the MT1300 beryl How to get Tailscale working on the Beryl MT-1300! I cant get much more than about 1-2 MB/s aka 8-16Mbs. CPU usage on the beryl jumps around at about 40-60% during those speeds. On wireguard I got much faster speeds

4.3.6 RC 1
iperf3 -s Test 1 is direct tailscale connections, test 2 is direct wireguard

Currently glinet is running version tailscale version 1.32.3-1 (OpenWrt)
However in version 1.40 tailscale claim to be faster than native wireguard.

Edit: I manually upgraded to tailscale 1.44 and unfortunately throughput was only slightly faster. 20Mbs or so.

Is this still the status quo, that it is better to use the plain OpenWRT firmware with LuCi than GL’s, to get Tailscale working on the AR300M?

Has anybody managed to get all GL router client traffic routed to a Tailscale exit node on any model router / firmware combination?

It seems that would be the key Tailscale functionality on travel routers in particular.

the AR300M doesn’t have enough RAM to effectively run a Tailscale exit node. You can do it, but to avoid having tailscale die from wireguard-go going OOM you need to make some non-trivial changes to the source code and rebuild it yourself.
on the AR300M you really should stick with standard wireguard. wireguard-go is just not being tuned for low memory use.

Many, many people run tailscale exit nodes on many models and firmwares.

I meant GL routers actually. How do you get custom exit nodes to show up in the dropdown menu under Gl firmware > Applications > Tailscale > Custom exit node?

Once you have a device acts as an exit node listed in Tailscale admin console, your router should list it in that pull down list by clicking the refresh link beside.


Perfect. I got it to work. Thanks!

When choosing a GL router as an exit node which is itself running WG in client mode, is there any way to have the domain/IP exceptions configured in the GL firmware be respected for tailscale-connected clients?

Read this first: Tailscale - GL.iNet Router Docs 4 (the Note part)

Does it have enough RAM to make other, less traffic intense Tailscale functionality useful, such as accessing printers or the admin interfaces of other tailscale clients or is it really not worth it to use tailscale on any of the less powerful GL routers?

Ok, I was already using an external DNS (Cloudflare). Other notes just point to tailscale support being in beta, but people started toying with it well over a year ago on this forum so someone might have had the same issue and found a solution.

It will run and may serve for light use, especially if you have nothing else running at the same time.

Sustained high throughput will be the end of it.

Doing a git clone of a large repo while sending the traffic through it will oomkill the tailscale process in about a minute. Again this is a wireguard-go issue.

Ok, I’ll just avoid tailscale on the low ram devices. Is there a way to install Tailscale on an SD card in the original Beryl? That model would have enough RAM, just not enough internal storage.

Also, do clients connected via Tailscale to a GL router show up in GL’s client list?

the combined binary probably saves you the most space.
it would be hard but not impossible to go much beyond what you can get out of the instructions on that page.

I think the connected clients is only ones that are getting an IP address from the DHCP server, but if there’s a VPN specific connected clients list… well, I don’t use it.

Wow, those results are impressive. 4,5 MB would likely fit on the 32 MB NOR flash of Beryl. I don’t have a go environment set up, unfortunately. Is there no service that distributes different kinds of packed versions of such programs like there is for javascript with jsdelivr a.o.?