AWS Client VPN vs Tailscale

Tailscale is a robust alternative to AWS Client VPN, and provides a comprehensive VPN solution that is performant and cost-saving, while being zero-config and can be set up in minutes. AWS Client VPN is a viable solution that ultimately finds itself limited by fundamental design decisions that lead to overly complex authorization rule management, inability to manage IPv6 or CIDR overlaps, and overall bottlenecked performance being based on TLS over OpenVPN. Coupled with AWS Client VPN's complex pricing structure, Tailscale provides a great alternative as a modern mesh networking solution.

Tailscale vs AWS Client VPN comparison matrix

Here’s a quick visual comparison of where Tailscale and AWS Client VPN stand on a feature-by-feature basis. We’ll dive more into each feature ‌below.

Tailscale vs AWS Client VPN architecture overview and performance implications

AWS Client VPN is a traditional hub-and-spoke VPN model that relies on establishing TLS tunnels to AWS-hosted VPN endpoints. All of this is done through an OpenVPN client. The endpoint is associated with target networks, and clients are assigned IPs from a set CIDR range. Traffic flows from the client, through the VPN endpoint, and then onto resources in AWS or on-premises networks.

Control and data planes are tightly coupled with AWS infrastructure, and management occurs with the AWS Console, CLI, PowerShell, or API. If needed, traffic can enter AWS VPCs through elastic network interfaces (ENIs) and Elastic IPs.

However, by design, performance is naturally bottlenecked. Each user connection has a maximum baseline bandwidth of 50Mbps, with potential increases available only by request. Even if this is increased, actual throughput may be further limited by overall network conditions, the number of users, and AWS endpoint design.

There are fundamental design decisions with AWS Client VPN that limit its flexibility. A huge limitation is that AWS Client VPN only supports IPv4, and not IPv6. This restricts any efforts to modernize and operate in IPv6 environments.

Problems with CIDR are another big hurdle. The client CIDR block cannot overlap with the VPC CIDR or any manually added routes. Overlapping CIDR ranges result in routing failures and connectivity issues, necessitating careful network design. Furthermore, once a Client VPN endpoint is created, its client CIDR range cannot be changed. Immutable client CIDR ranges mean proper sizing and planning are essential up front, and any miscalculation may require redeployment, causing disruptions and administrative overhead.

And if you need IP forwarding? That’s not supported either. But all of the above that you cannot do with AWS Client VPN, are possible to do with Tailscale.

Tailscale does not use a traditional model, instead employing an overlay mesh network with direct peer-to-peer connections. These direct connections are the data plane, which is facilitated by encrypted end-to-end WireGuard® tunnels. The control plane is separate from the data plane, where Tailscale uses a coordination server to help peers share public keys and addresses to establish direct connections.

Because WireGuard® is built into the kernel or runs in a high-efficiency module, it is capable of high throughput with low overhead. Furthermore, the distributed nature of this data plane means there is no single bottleneck like a gateway. Traffic takes the shortest path available through NAT traversal, improving reliability and latency.

Tailscale vs AWS Client VPN encryption and security

AWS Client VPN secures traffic using SSL/TLS over OpenVPN, with authentication options ranging from Active Directory, federated SSO, to certificate-based methods. All client-to-endpoint traffic is encrypted.

While SSL/TLS is sound for encryption, it often limits throughput in practice. SSL VPN throughput often caps below the physical link speed, especially under deep packet inspection. This can result in failed TLS negotiations, commonly due to firewall rules blocking TCP/UDP traffic, incorrect certificate setup, or expired certificate revocation lists. It can also cause tunnel drops and unstable sessions.

Tailscale’s basis on WireGuard® means a policy of deny-by-default. Tailscale’s data plane is also peer-to-peer and decentralized, meaning user data is kept private between the endpoints by design. When two devices communicate, they establish a direct WireGuard® tunnel with each other’s public keys. In effect, every pair of communicating nodes has its own private, secured channel. Effectively, Tailscale’s data plane is distributed without a singular device bottlenecking traffic.

As for encryption, Tailscale’s control plane employs a custom Noise IK-based protocol with X25519 as described in RFC7748. While it can operate directly over plain TCP in environments that allow it, it also supports being wrapped in TLS when necessary for compatibility or additional security requirements. Tailscale exclusively uses the WireGuard® protocol for its data plane, which has a fixed cryptographic suite including ChaCha20 for encryption and Poly1305 for authentication.

Tailscale vs AWS Client VPN authentication

AWS Client VPN integrates with identity providers through Active Directory authentication,

certificate-based mutual authentication, and SAML 2.0-based federated authentication. The SAML 2.0 protocol allows AWS Client VPN to integrate with any identity provider that supports this standard, such as Okta and Microsoft Entra ID.

While authentication itself is the standard fare, there are frequent reports from users who experience authentication failures. This includes expired or invalid certificates, incorrect Active Directory or SAML credentials, and issues with federated authentication setups.

Unlike AWS Client VPN, Tailscale is never an identity provider and never stores passwords. Tailscale completely offloads authentication and multi-factor enforcement to your chosen identity provider, and completely removes the need to manage certificates manually. Authentication happens natively with identity providers and SSO login. Users can authenticate with their provider of choice, such as Apple, Google, Microsoft, Okta, or other custom identity providers.

As for authorizing devices, Tailscale admins can approve new devices or configure auto-approval. This approval process adds an extra layer of security in case a user’s password is compromised. But even once on a tailnet, devices rely on cryptographic keys for trust, and an admin can centrally revoke a node’s key if a device is lost or stolen, instantly cutting off its access. This core principle works with Tailscale SSH, an SSH solution where you don’t need a password to directly SSH into devices.

Tailscale vs AWS Client VPN policy enforcement

Beyond initial authentication, AWS Client VPN manages and enforces access policies primarily through authorization rules and integration with AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM). Network access is also controllable through AWS VPC security groups, and IAM policies govern who can create, modify, or delete VPN settings and endpoints.

Authorization rules act as firewall-like controls defined at the VPN endpoint level. These authorization rules define which user groups are permitted to access particular subnets or CIDR blocks. These rules are explicit, but by default, all access is denied unless specifically permitted by an authorization rule.

Authorization is generally tied to Active Directory groups or SAML attributes. Access granularity is based on group membership and assigned CIDR blocks. For each allowed network, a corresponding authorization rule must be created, and these are evaluated using longest prefix match to determine access precedence.

While you can allow groups to access certain networks, there is no built-in mechanism to narrowly restrict portions of traffic or apply fine-grained, application-level permissions. Authorization is enforced at the network layer, and you can’t restrict access beyond these groups.

In practice, this results in complexity around overlapping CIDRs that needs careful network design to avoid routing conflicts. Users struggle with authorization rules, primarily with them not correlating properly with route table entries. This often leads to clients being unable to access specific resources or subnets.

Tailscale uses identity-based access policies that include ACLs and Grants that allow for application-layer access control. Administrators define an ACL policy (in JSON format) that specifies which users or groups can access which destinations (IP addresses or tags) and on which ports​. Administrators can specify policies per user and device name instead of IP addresses. Using groups and tags, administrators can implement Role-Based Access controls (RBACs) easily, with the ability to manage policy files via GitOps.

Tailscale vs AWS Client VPN initial setup and management

Initial setup of AWS Client VPN can be long and complex due to VPN, subnet, and security group design. Setups often require multi-step processes when configuring each AWS endpoint. Authorization rules are complex, and misconfiguration can result in a bevy of errors. Certificates may need to be manually managed, leading to errors and connectivity issues. CIDR configuration is error-prone and requires careful planning, but it is unavoidable.

By contrast, Tailscale focuses on simplified installation and administration. From an end-user perspective, Tailscale often feels invisible. Configuration for Tailscale can be easily managed incrementally, so that users can connect to resources as soon as they join a network.

There is no hardware to deploy. Tailscale maintains the coordination server to exchange users’ public keys. All you need to get started is to create a Tailscale account (often by logging in with Google/Microsoft/Okta), install the client on two devices, and they instantly form a private network​. There’s no need to configure IP ranges, firewall rules, or NAT traversal because Tailscale handles all of that automatically.

Tailscale vs AWS Client VPN cost and pricing

There is a lot of pricing micromanagement needed with AWS Client VPN. You have to worry about two hourly cost factors. First, there is a per-hour cost for each AWS Client VPN endpoint association to a subnet. This means each association has an hourly fee just for existing. Secondly, there’s a per-hour cost for each active client connection. Overall, you not only have to try to minimize connection times, but you also have to actively manage associated subnets to try to lower fees.

On top of all this are any potential data transfer costs, the need to keep in mind that pricing may vary from region to region, and you may want add-ons to improve the basic logging functionalities of AWS Client VPN.

Tailscale has flat pricing that is a straightforward charge per user. No hardware costs with networking appliances, and easy to set up without spending extra on resources. Reach out to our sales team today to get a demo.

The bottom line

AWS Client VPN’s pricing is, and what it gets you is a baseline design and feature set that cannot meet the long-term needs of a modern company. Tailscale provides a modern mesh network experience that yields better time-to-value, lends itself to cost savings, improves developer productivity, and is easy to set up and manage over time.

You can also check out how customers like Awesome have benefited from choosing Tailscale over AWS Client VPN.