Zayo vs strongSwan
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Zayo and strongSwan.
Quick Verdict
3.3/5
Zayo
0 reviews
3.7/5
strongSwan
0 reviews
strongSwan is rated higher (3.7 vs 3.3). More than 240,000 route miles and 34 million fiber miles worldwide across North America, Europe and global reach (2026 figures) Modular open-source IPsec/IKE (IKEv2, RFC 7296) suite for site-to-site and remote-access VPNs, with X.509, smartcard/TPM, and EAP authentication. Runs on Linux, FreeBSD, macOS, Windows, and Android; GPLv2, free.
Zayo Fiber network and colocation carrier | strongSwan Open-source IPsec VPN implementation for Linux and embedded systems | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 3.3 (0 reviews) | 3.7 (0 reviews)✓ |
| Pricing model | paid | free |
| Starting price | Free tier available | Free |
| Best for | Enterprises, carriers and content operators buying dedicated transport capacity — dark fiber, 100G/400G wavelengths, private networks and colocation cross-connects — across North America and Western Europe | Infrastructure teams building standards-compliant IPsec gateways, site-to-site tunnels, or certificate/EAP-based remote access on Linux, BSD, or embedded hardware, who are comfortable operating open-source security software. |
| Features | ||
| IPv6 | ✓ | |
| DDoS protection | ✓ | |
| Automated backups | ||
| Snapshots | ||
| Managed option | ||
| Bare metal | ||
| GPU available | ||
| S3-compatible | ||
| Hourly billing | ||
| Free tier | ✓ | |
| Tags | ||
| Tags | eu datacenterus datacenterprivate networking | free tieropen sourceself hostable |
| Visit Zayo → | Visit strongSwan → | |
Zayo
Pros
- + Tier-1 backbone: 240,000+ route miles, 11+ unique North American long-haul routes and genuine path diversity
- + Specific published SLAs (99.9% unprotected, 99.95% protected; 100% CloudLink guarantee) rather than marketing uptime claims
- + Real network-based DDoS mitigation (50 Tb+ capacity) with 24/7 NOC and SOC operations
- + Deep transport portfolio — dark fiber, 400G/800G wavelengths, Ethernet, IP transit, colocation — under one contract
Cons
- - No public pricing and no self-serve anything: quote-based, multi-year, engineer-installed
- - Procurement and install timelines are long; not viable for small or urgent deployments
- - APAC presence is subsea reach and partner interconnect, not owned metro fiber
- - Carrier-grade support experience is inconsistent in public enterprise forums; negotiate escalation terms
strongSwan
Pros
- + Complete IKEv2 (RFC 7296) implementation with IKEv1 legacy support, free under GPLv2
- + Deep authentication: X.509 attribute certificates, PKCS#11 smartcards, TPM 2.0, EAP/RADIUS
- + Multiplatform — Linux, FreeBSD, macOS, Windows (MinGW), and a native Android client
- + Two-node HA mode with state takeover, MOBIKE for roaming peers, full IPv6 support
- + Plugin architecture and distro packages make it embeddable and easy to deploy
Cons
- - Steep configuration learning curve — swanctl, IKE proposals, and IPsec policy are expert tooling
- - No vendor SLA; free community support, commercial support is optional and limited
- - Overkill for simple server-to-server encryption where WireGuard is easier and faster
- - Patching and PKI operations are entirely on you
- - No control plane, dashboard, or appliance — it is a component, not a product
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new hosting and infrastructure providers, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.