this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
3 points (71.4% liked)

Selfhosted

40041 readers
880 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
3
Access local cockpit instance without port forwarding (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 year ago by legoraft@lemmy.world to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Hi, I've recently built myself my first server to host a minecraft server. I manage this server through cockpit, which isn't port forwarded.

Now I'm going to move to a different place, but I want to keep that server at this house because of more stable internet and me moving to a smaller space, but I don't know how I could access this server remotely.

I've already tried adding a vpn to my router, but when connected, I still can't access my cockpit dashboard. Am I doing anything wrong or do I need to port forward to access my cockpit instance remotely?

top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] momsi@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Probably it would be much easier for you to setup tailscale. Just install it on the system you host the other services, install on the other end and use the tailscale ip. It should require minimal effort to set up with the added benefit of not having ports open, and way easier maintaining.

As for wireguard, the allowed up section tells what ips should be routed through the tunnel, it's not that difficult, but hard to wrap your head around at first. A friend of mine also used to use the Fritzbox Implementation of wireguard and I remember you need to specifically setup what clients you want the tunnel to have access to.

Have a look at tailscale.

[–] legoraft@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Thank you for the info! I'll take a look at tailscale and try to wrap my head around the wireguard thing. Thanks for the help!

[–] decta@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago

this.

[–] Oha@lemmy.ohaa.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

Would probably setup something like Pivpn on the server and port forward it

[–] tvcvt@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There’s not a lot of information to go on here, but my first thought is that you haven’t configured your VPN to route to the local network. So, while you may be getting a connection to the VPN server, your computer doesn’t know where to send traffic for Cockpit.

There is usually a way to push those routes to the client from your con server.

[–] legoraft@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hi! I've done a bit more thorough googling, because of you I knew what to look for a bit better. I have a wireguard vpn on my fritz box router enabled, which allows me to connect to the vpn from my laptop.

I've read up on how to acces local devices and I found something about adding an IP to the "AllowedIPs" section, but I don't really get which IP I should add.

[–] drkt@feddit.dk 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
[–] momsi@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

This would tell the peer with this configuration to send all traffic for the whole 192.168.1.0/24 through the tunnel, not sure that is what OP wants. (Didn't look at the link though)

[–] moonpiedumplings@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

While not what OP wants, this is what I want, but it isn't working for me. I am trying expose a subnet behind nat, to a public server. I am currently testing this by attempting to expose the vlan created by libvirt on my laptop to my public vps. I followed the linked point to site guide, and ironically, the virtual machines created on my laptop can access the wireguard subnet, but public vps cannot access the virtual machines? (the guide said that it would be the opposite without the iptables nat/masquerade rules) I am guessing because I am doing this somewhat backwards, where the device exposing the lan is behind nat, whereas it is the other way around in the guides that I have seen.

[–] tvcvt@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

The folks replying here have pretty much hit the nail on the head. Adding your home network to that AllowedIPs line in the confit file should do the trick.

Someone else mentioned Tailscale, which would be another great option—with a web UI to dial in routes.

[–] Decronym@lemmy.decronym.xyz 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

Fewer Letters More Letters
IP Internet Protocol
SSD Solid State Drive mass storage
VPN Virtual Private Network

3 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 6 acronyms.

[Thread #49 for this sub, first seen 16th Aug 2023, 05:25] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]