Looking through the docs and didn't see it so I'm making this, I was wondering if there's a possibility of having pangolin use wireguard tunnels that are tunneled via tcp? Similar to something like htun or what is described in this article
So that all that would be needed is outbound traffic on port 443 for edge servers running newt instead of using a separate port for wireguard?
flowchart LR
subgraph InternalNetwork["Internal Network"]
pangolin["Pangolin"]
gerbil["Gerbil"]
pangolin <--> gerbil
end
subgraph RemoteNetwork["Remote Network"]
subgraph RemoteServer["Remote Server"]
ssh["SSH Service"]
newt["Newt"]
end
end
newt <-->|TCP Tunnel on 443| gerbil
newt <--> ssh
Originally created by @SelfhostedPro on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/fosrl/pangolin/issues/1227
Looking through the docs and didn't see it so I'm making this, I was wondering if there's a possibility of having pangolin use wireguard tunnels that are tunneled via tcp? Similar to something like [htun](https://github.com/AdrianVollmer/htun/) or what is described in [this article](https://www.eduvpn.org/running-wireguard-over-tcp-a-solution-for-udp-blocking-issues/)
So that all that would be needed is outbound traffic on port 443 for edge servers running newt instead of using a separate port for wireguard?
```mermaid
flowchart LR
subgraph InternalNetwork["Internal Network"]
pangolin["Pangolin"]
gerbil["Gerbil"]
pangolin <--> gerbil
end
subgraph RemoteNetwork["Remote Network"]
subgraph RemoteServer["Remote Server"]
ssh["SSH Service"]
newt["Newt"]
end
end
newt <-->|TCP Tunnel on 443| gerbil
newt <--> ssh
```
@oschwartz10612 commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025):
Interesting idea. What would be the reason to use http instead of wireguard? Just to avoid DPI blocking it?
<!-- gh-comment-id:3161826954 -->
@oschwartz10612 commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025):
Interesting idea. What would be the reason to use http instead of wireguard? Just to avoid DPI blocking it?
@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 21, 2025):
This issue has been automatically marked as stale due to 14 days of inactivity. It will be closed in 14 days if no further activity occurs.
<!-- gh-comment-id:3208533098 -->
@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 21, 2025):
This issue has been automatically marked as stale due to 14 days of inactivity. It will be closed in 14 days if no further activity occurs.
@oschwartz10612 commented on GitHub (Aug 23, 2025):
I have heard some good reasons for this around DPI but I dont think we
have the bandwidth to tackle it quite yet. :{
<!-- gh-comment-id:3216280817 -->
@oschwartz10612 commented on GitHub (Aug 23, 2025):
I have heard some good reasons for this around DPI but I dont think we
have the bandwidth to tackle it quite yet. :{
@SelfhostedPro commented on GitHub (Aug 23, 2025):
No worries! I was able to sort out a solution with OpenZiti.
Just was due to firewall restrictions in some locations.
<!-- gh-comment-id:3216291990 -->
@SelfhostedPro commented on GitHub (Aug 23, 2025):
No worries! I was able to sort out a solution with OpenZiti.
Just was due to firewall restrictions in some locations.
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Originally created by @SelfhostedPro on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/fosrl/pangolin/issues/1227
Looking through the docs and didn't see it so I'm making this, I was wondering if there's a possibility of having pangolin use wireguard tunnels that are tunneled via tcp? Similar to something like htun or what is described in this article
So that all that would be needed is outbound traffic on port 443 for edge servers running newt instead of using a separate port for wireguard?
@oschwartz10612 commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025):
Interesting idea. What would be the reason to use http instead of wireguard? Just to avoid DPI blocking it?
@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 21, 2025):
This issue has been automatically marked as stale due to 14 days of inactivity. It will be closed in 14 days if no further activity occurs.
@oschwartz10612 commented on GitHub (Aug 23, 2025):
I have heard some good reasons for this around DPI but I dont think we
have the bandwidth to tackle it quite yet. :{
@SelfhostedPro commented on GitHub (Aug 23, 2025):
No worries! I was able to sort out a solution with OpenZiti.
Just was due to firewall restrictions in some locations.