Network protocol
Defines peer communication: setup, authentication, key establishment, data transport and failure handling.
VPN PROTOCOL GUIDE
Understand the protocol.
Choose with context.
Compare Veilora 2.0, WireGuard, OpenVPN and IKEv2/IPsec by design and operating context, without a universal speed ranking.
01 / CONTEXT
Protocol, platform or policy?
Proxy platform
Combines inbound and outbound connections, routing, DNS and protocol implementations. It is not a single transport protocol.
Service policy
Data retention, logging, node operation and support depend on the service provider, not just its protocol.
02 / COMPARISON
Four approaches to a connection.
A comparison of design boundaries, not an absolute security or performance score. Scroll the table horizontally on smaller screens.
| Dimension | Veilora 2.0 | WireGuard | OpenVPN | IKEv2/IPsec |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Role | Managed connection architecture | Minimal Layer-3 encrypted tunnel | Configurable VPN protocol and implementation | Key exchange combined with IPsec |
| Transport | Reference model covers TCP and UDP handling | IP packets over UDP | UDP or TCP | IKE usually uses UDP; data uses IPsec, with UDP encapsulation for NAT traversal |
| Network changes | Recovery and node reselection in the design model | Endpoint roaming; client behavior matters | Reconnection depends on configuration and implementation | MOBIKE can support mobility where implemented |
| Obfuscation | Depends on the released version and node configuration | Not a base protocol goal | May need an additional transport or external mechanism | Not a base protocol goal |
| Operations | App and node coordination | Self-hosting, integrations and managed services | Self-hosting, enterprise and managed services | System-native clients and enterprise integration |
| Useful when | Client-managed routing and lifecycle are desired | A small implementation and key management fit the use case | Compatibility and detailed configuration are priorities | Native integration and enterprise authentication matter |
| Evidence | Published design notes; deployed details pending | Official protocol documentation and implementations | Official source, manuals and project documentation | IETF specifications and specific implementations |
03 / PLATFORMS
A platform can combine protocols.
| Project | Role | Boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Clash / Mihomo | Rule-based proxy engine: outbounds, DNS and traffic rules | Evaluate the selected protocol and configuration |
| sing-box | General-purpose proxy platform with inbounds, outbounds and routing | Different outbounds have different security models |
| V2Ray | Composable proxy, transport and routing components | A platform name alone cannot establish security or performance |
04 / VEILORA 2.0
The whole connection lifecycle.
Follow the detailed reference model from authorization through DNS, routing, encrypted sessions, data transport, recovery and cleanup.
Read the Veilora 2.0 technical notes →05 / QUESTIONS
Common questions
Does a protocol imply no logging?
No. Logging is a matter of service architecture, data handling and operating policy. Veilora’s logging policy remains pending.
Is Veilora 2.0 an App version?
No. Protocol generations and App release numbers describe different things and should be tracked separately.
Which protocol is fastest?
There is no permanent ranking without test conditions. Hardware, load, distance, MTU and the network can change the result.
Does this mean all listed protocols are supported?
No. The comparison explains technical roles, not a product compatibility matrix. Releases and node configuration determine actual availability.