frp vs strongSwan
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted remote access & vpn options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
frp
Fast reverse proxy to expose local servers behind NAT
VS
strongSwan
Modern IPsec-based VPN implementation
| Feature | frp | strongSwan |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Remote Access & VPN | Remote Access & VPN |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | Go | C |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | binary, docker | bare-metal, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 108,622 | ★ 2,934 |
| First released | 2016 | 2005 |
| Replaces | ngrok | Cisco AnyConnect |
Why pick each one
Choose frp if…
- Released under the Apache-2.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 108.6k GitHub stars
- Written in Go
Choose strongSwan if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Active community (2.9k GitHub stars)
- Written in C
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is frp or strongSwan better?
frp is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler medium setup. Consider strongSwan if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are frp and strongSwan free and open-source?
Yes. frp is licensed under Apache-2.0 and strongSwan under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run frp and strongSwan with Docker?
frp: yes. strongSwan: check the project docs for container support.