I am sorry that you find whatever I say as nothing but "jargon". I assume that those interested in Octelium are already interested in zero trust architectures as defined by NIST, simply products such as Cloudlfare Access, Teleport, StrongDM, Google BeyondCorp, Zscaler ZTNA, etc... I will do my best to simplify the README soon.
I am the potential target audience and I assure you it's understandable and clear.
I share some (very little) from some of the criticism regarding the clarity, but I disagree you need a tagine like Tailscale while your solution does several times more things.
Great product, im chewing through the docs already :)
Thank you. You're welcome to ask any questions regarding the internals of Octelium via the emails or Slack/Discord channels. You can find all the contact links in the repo's README or on the website.
I wouldn't take this line of thinking too much to heart. At some point, a piece of technology is too complex for a person to parse what it means without sufficient background in this space. The "buzzwords" simply aren't buzzwords; you are using real words that accurately describe the project. People look at them, and either don't have sufficient knowledge to parse them in context, or are used to seeing them co-opted for use in low-effort marketing. I have some experience in this space (not a whole lot), and I was able to understand.
I like where you are going with the graphics in the readme; I'd spend some effort on creating "intended usecase" scenarios, scenarios that highlight situations where the project is the perfect fit. Using a few of these to highlight very different applications give people a good mental map of where this project would fit well for them.
"John is looking for a way to provide access to an internal tool to work-from-home colleagues. This isn't simple to do because [...]. Octelium is a good fit because [...]. Here is how John would set it up: [...]"
