Regarding the ongoing issue with failed deployments.
I did manage to narrow it down, sadly it seems like LXD is at fault here.
If you send LXD a container creation request, it simply does not reply always.
But creates the container in the background, which is kinda bad, because it would also mean it can affect reinstalls.
However, you can start another reinstall if the first one fails, since it seems to work on the second try for some reason.
It does not look like a timeout problem or such, as it does not matter if you set the timeout to 60s, LXD just wont answer.
There is a theoretically fix for that, that would kinda duct tape it but I would rather fix it at the core.
I will post again once I fixed it, since is is kinda essential, I have put everything on HOLD for this project.
SG will be rebooted tomorrow night, to help troubleshoot the ongoing deployment issues.
All Containers will be automatically started after the reboot, it should not take longer than 5 minutes.
NL will be physically moved to another data room next week, more information will follow
NL will be moved into another rack on Tuesday, it will be de racked and racked up again so should not take long, no exact time window on that.
LA, SG and NO have currently issues with the LVM backend, which results in poor I/O performance or failed deployments in SG.
The Plan would be for these locations, to migrate existing containers to a new LVM pool, which should solve these issues.
However, the operation could lead to data loss so I advise anyone if you have a container in one of these locations, take a backup before they will be migrated.
This will take place at the following days:
LA Friday, 16:00 GMT, approximately 1 hour
SG Friday 19:00 GMT, approximately 1 hour
NO Sunday, 19:00 GMT, approximately 2 hours
The Downtime will likely to be shorter for each container, as long nothing comes in-between.
During the maintenance, you won't be able to control the container via microlxc.net.
After the maintenance stock will be available again on these locations, including NO.
Tokyo is not affected by this, however if we upgrade NL and AU, we likely will performance this maintenance additional or if it becomes necessary.
CH will be not moved to another LVM Backend, since I plan to discontinue it, due to the network related issues.
However don't plan to discontinue CH until we have a replacement, currently I am still looking for one.
I keep you updated on this.
LA maintenance is done, total downtime was 3 minutes + about 1 minute for each container.
Sadly IPv6 died again, we are working on it, so the downtime was a bit higher + a few reboots.
@vyas said:
Thanks for the awesome work. I had written a short review of MicroLXC on my blog a few days ago. Added this discussion to keep track of updates.
Please tell me what is the Control Panel being used in this project, which is pictured on @vyas' blog page. Thanks!
@vyas said:
Thanks for the awesome work. I had written a short review of MicroLXC on my blog a few days ago. Added this discussion to keep track of updates.
Please tell me what is the Control Panel being used in this project, which is pictured on @vyas' blog page. Thanks!
@vyas said:
Thanks for the awesome work. I had written a short review of MicroLXC on my blog a few days ago. Added this discussion to keep track of updates.
Please tell me what is the Control Panel being used in this project, which is pictured on @vyas' blog page. Thanks!
It's a custom built one.
Is it open source? If yes, where are the sources? Thanks!
@vyas said:
Thanks for the awesome work. I had written a short review of MicroLXC on my blog a few days ago. Added this discussion to keep track of updates.
Please tell me what is the Control Panel being used in this project, which is pictured on @vyas' blog page. Thanks!
It's a custom built one.
Is it open source? If yes, where are the sources? Thanks!
the issue I face "Configure instance: Failed to mount LVM logical volume: Failed to mount '/dev/secondary/containers_lxccef844a4' on '/var/snap/lxd/common/lxd/storage-pools/secondary/containers/lxccef844a4': no such device or address"
@vyas said:
Thanks for the awesome work. I had written a short review of MicroLXC on my blog a few days ago. Added this discussion to keep track of updates.
Every time I stop visiting your website, all of a sudden there’s a content tsunami. When I do visit regularly, it feels like my fridge. Mostly empty.
@vyas said:
Thanks for the awesome work. I had written a short review of MicroLXC on my blog a few days ago. Added this discussion to keep track of updates.
Every time I stop visiting your website, all of a sudden there’s a content tsunami. When I do visit regularly, it feels like my fridge. Mostly empty.
Y U do dis
Just for you my friend, just for you. I publish multiple times to irritate you
Now the RSS feed is working again.
Aiming for one new post everyday for the first month. As a moving target, might keep extending it.
the issue I face "Configure instance: Failed to mount LVM logical volume: Failed to mount '/dev/secondary/containers_lxccef844a4' on '/var/snap/lxd/common/lxd/storage-pools/secondary/containers/lxccef844a4': no such device or address"
may be it needs some manual review
I disabled lvm tools host again, seems to be causing these issues.
When I was working on the lvm volumes it was suggested to enable the lvm host tools to prevent issues but instead it was causing these.
Please try again, I did try 4 deploys on SG in a row, seems to work fine now.
Additional, I switched the image source to local, should be faster and more reliable on deployments.
@vyas said:
Thanks for the awesome work. I had written a short review of MicroLXC on my blog a few days ago. Added this discussion to keep track of updates.
Please tell me what is the Control Panel being used in this project, which is pictured on @vyas' blog page. Thanks!
It's a custom built one.
Is it open source? If yes, where are the sources? Thanks!
Well, the Maintenance did not go by plan, waiting for an IPMI.
Stuff will remain online until the IPMI appears, but I have no ETA when exactly I hope in the next hours.
just to continue a conversation from the other thread in a more appropriate place, what sort of specs do you want/need to get a location exclusive to LES users started?
@AnthonySmith said:
just to continue a conversation from the other thread in a more appropriate place, what sort of specs do you want/need to get a location exclusive to LES users started?
Depends, how many users do you expect to use it?
How many resources should each user be able to use?
If you want everyone got get a 1GB or even 2GB VM, the node needs to be equal big, of course you can oversell a bit.
@AnthonySmith said:
just to continue a conversation from the other thread in a more appropriate place, what sort of specs do you want/need to get a location exclusive to LES users started?
Depends, how many users do you expect to use it?
How many resources should each user be able to use?
If you want everyone got get a 1GB or even 2GB VM, the node needs to be equal big, of course you can oversell a bit.
Well I was looking at the plans you offer on microlxc.net, seem quite odd unless you intended to type MB instead of GB on the disk space?
Not sure what the ratio is you find useable on LXC, on VZ6 for LES in the early days 8:1 on ram and 4:1 on disk worked fine without issues.
@AnthonySmith said:
just to continue a conversation from the other thread in a more appropriate place, what sort of specs do you want/need to get a location exclusive to LES users started?
Depends, how many users do you expect to use it?
How many resources should each user be able to use?
If you want everyone got get a 1GB or even 2GB VM, the node needs to be equal big, of course you can oversell a bit.
Well I was looking at the plans you offer on microlxc.net, seem quite odd unless you intended to type MB instead of GB on the disk space?
The dot is invisible.
Not sure what the ratio is you find useable on LXC, on VZ6 for LES in the early days 8:1 on ram and 4:1 on disk worked fine without issues.
However, I expected at least half a gig and a bit of NVMe storage, no idea make it at least a 8GB KVM, with 70GB NVMe+ should be fine. So we could offer 512MB, 7GB NVMe, oversell it a bit, should fit 20 users easily.
@AnthonySmith said:
just to continue a conversation from the other thread in a more appropriate place, what sort of specs do you want/need to get a location exclusive to LES users started?
Depends, how many users do you expect to use it?
How many resources should each user be able to use?
If you want everyone got get a 1GB or even 2GB VM, the node needs to be equal big, of course you can oversell a bit.
Well I was looking at the plans you offer on microlxc.net, seem quite odd unless you intended to type MB instead of GB on the disk space?
Not sure what the ratio is you find useable on LXC, on VZ6 for LES in the early days 8:1 on ram and 4:1 on disk worked fine without issues.
Now I see the almost invisible dots! I missed the dots completely the first time around! ?
But I don't yet understand the ratios: 8 something to 1 ram and 4 something to 1 disk. Would you please tell us what is the "something?" Thanks!
I signed up to see what LXC is all about, and plan to deploy a replica of pushupsstatibus.
I decided to start a new series of hostnames box0-box9, in addition to the existing series vps0-vps9, to alleviate my "running out of hostnames" issue.
From now on, any free or NAT server will be called boxN, while paid and non-NAT (dedicate IPv4 or only IPv6) will be called vpsN.
This container would be box0.
Gmail is putting "microLXC Code" to the spam folder.
You need MXroute, or at least DKIM signature.
We accept Karma donations for the last flan. 🍮 affbrr
Hey, if you're planning to run a VPN on this plan, use @Nyr's installer script. Works great!
?
Haha, I just wanted to make sure it worked here
Does it?
I don't expect it to work on unprivileged lxc containers, they would need to be privileged.
However, wireguard native should work fine, since the kernel module is enabled.
Maybe you can fallback to wireguard at some point.
Hey, if you're planning to run a VPN on this plan, use @Nyr's installer script. Works great!
?
Haha, I just wanted to make sure it worked here
Does it?
I don't expect it to work on unprivileged lxc containers, they would need to be privileged.
However, wireguard native should work fine, since the kernel module is enabled.
Maybe you can fallback to wireguard at some point.
Hey, if you're planning to run a VPN on this plan, use @Nyr's installer script. Works great!
?
Haha, I just wanted to make sure it worked here
Does it?
I don't expect it to work on unprivileged lxc containers, they would need to be privileged.
However, wireguard native should work fine, since the kernel module is enabled.
Maybe you can fallback to wireguard at some point.
The NL node which the microLXC NL KVM was on, had a hardware failure today.
Since the VM cluster is HA, we only had a downtime of 7 minutes in total, premium.
I don't expect it to work on unprivileged lxc containers, they would need to be privileged.
However, wireguard native should work fine, since the kernel module is enabled.
Maybe you can fallback to wireguard at some point.
Sorry for the late response, I did not take a look until today.
Yes, both openvpn-install and wireguard-install work without modification. When running inside containers, the Wireguard installer relies on user space BoringTon so it does not require the kernel module.
PS: very cool service, I will keep my container in Johannesburg!
I jumped on one of these MicroLXC containers a few days ago after I read in the Cest Pit @Neoon's post that it was MicroLXC's third birthday. 🎂🎂🎂 Thanks to @Neoon for all the work put into the project!
I am on the LA node from @seriesn. Thanks to @seriesn and the other sponsors!
Everything I've tried so far seems to work really great! I think, as somebody who also is selling LXC containers, I am a little bit enabled to appreciate how much work is involved. I have to say, I'd be really glad if people felt that my containers work as well as Neoon's. Plus, @Neoon's gone way further than me with the very cool microlxc.net website.
There are differences in container management between Proxmox, which I am using, and LXD, which @Neoon is using. One difference that I, as a user, noticed is that the initially installed container images are different. At least for Debian, Proxmox's images are older, so they need updating, and quite a bit more software seems to be included in the default install.
Among other uses, I have the idea that my MicroLXC container could function as a backup email receiver (MTA). My primary email receivers are configured to reject emails from servers which fail certain basic tests, such as having reverse DNS set. However, I also like to have backup receivers with a more liberal policy. Everybody makes mistakes, and very occasionally I do see an email I want to receive despite its having been sent from a less than happily configured server. Also, sometimes it can be amusing to read the logs and the headers of spam plus also the ridiculous offers.
I have Apache2 installed in my container, and it seems to work fine. I also have a self-compiled Caddy binary which I want to work on a bit more.
I've never used a NAT VPS before. So here are a couple of questions in case anybody has time to give me a hint or two:
Receiving email works great on IPv6, but not on IPv4. I am guessing this is because the port 25 connections are not being forwarded. Is there a way to enable inbound port 25 on IPv4?
Apache2 seems to log IPv6 requests correctly, but seems to be logging all IPv4 requests as originating from the container's gateway. How does one solve this logging problem in the context of MicroLXC? In the following snippet from /etc/apache2/apache2.conf, why is X-Forwarded-For not recommended? Is mod_remoteip appropriate with microlxc's setup?
# Note that the use of %{X-Forwarded-For}i instead of %h is not recommended.
# Use mod_remoteip instead.
Thanks again to @Neoon and @seriesn! Lots of fun! Great project! Great website! High performance! 👍
I jumped on one of these MicroLXC containers a few days ago after I read in the Cest Pit @Neoon's post that it was MicroLXC's third birthday. 🎂🎂🎂 Thanks to @Neoon for all the work put into the project!
NanoKVM turned 3, microLXC is about to turn 1 year.
I am on the LA node from @seriesn. Thanks to @seriesn and the other sponsors!
Everything I've tried so far seems to work really great! I think, as somebody who also is selling LXC containers, I am a little bit enabled to appreciate how much work is involved. I have to say, I'd be really glad if people felt that my containers work as well as Neoon's. Plus, @Neoon's gone way further than me with the very cool microlxc.net website.
There are differences in container management between Proxmox, which I am using, and LXD, which @Neoon is using. One difference that I, as a user, noticed is that the initially installed container images are different. At least for Debian, Proxmox's images are older, so they need updating, and quite a bit more software seems to be included in the default install.
Among other uses, I have the idea that my MicroLXC container could function as a backup email receiver (MTA). My primary email receivers are configured to reject emails from servers which fail certain basic tests, such as having reverse DNS set. However, I also like to have backup receivers with a more liberal policy. Everybody makes mistakes, and very occasionally I do see an email I want to receive despite its having been sent from a less than happily configured server. Also, sometimes it can be amusing to read the logs and the headers of spam plus also the ridiculous offers.
I have Apache2 installed in my container, and it seems to work fine. I also have a self-compiled Caddy binary which I want to work on a bit more.
I've never used a NAT VPS before. So here are a couple of questions in case anybody has time to give me a hint or two:
Receiving email works great on IPv6, but not on IPv4. I am guessing this is because the port 25 connections are not being forwarded. Is there a way to enable inbound port 25 on IPv4?
its NAT, so 25 is not forwarded but v6 should work fine
Apache2 seems to log IPv6 requests correctly, but seems to be logging all IPv4 requests as originating from the container's gateway. How does one solve this logging problem in the context of MicroLXC? In the following snippet from /etc/apache2/apache2.conf, why is X-Forwarded-For not recommended? Is mod_remoteip appropriate with microlxc's setup?
Because your container does terminate the TLS connections, not the HAProxy, means we actually provide end to end encryption. Downside is, that HAProxy does not act as transparent proxy, means origin IP is replaced by the node IP as you see it.
The encrypted packages are routed based on the SNI header.
Thanks again to @Neoon and @seriesn! Lots of fun! Great project! Great website! High performance! 👍
I jumped on one of these MicroLXC containers a few days ago after I read in the Cest Pit @Neoon's post that it was MicroLXC's third birthday. 🎂🎂🎂 Thanks to @Neoon for all the work put into the project!
I am on the LA node from @seriesn. Thanks to @seriesn and the other sponsors!
Everything I've tried so far seems to work really great! I think, as somebody who also is selling LXC containers, I am a little bit enabled to appreciate how much work is involved. I have to say, I'd be really glad if people felt that my containers work as well as Neoon's. Plus, @Neoon's gone way further than me with the very cool microlxc.net website.
There are differences in container management between Proxmox, which I am using, and LXD, which @Neoon is using. One difference that I, as a user, noticed is that the initially installed container images are different. At least for Debian, Proxmox's images are older, so they need updating, and quite a bit more software seems to be included in the default install.
Among other uses, I have the idea that my MicroLXC container could function as a backup email receiver (MTA). My primary email receivers are configured to reject emails from servers which fail certain basic tests, such as having reverse DNS set. However, I also like to have backup receivers with a more liberal policy. Everybody makes mistakes, and very occasionally I do see an email I want to receive despite its having been sent from a less than happily configured server. Also, sometimes it can be amusing to read the logs and the headers of spam plus also the ridiculous offers.
I have Apache2 installed in my container, and it seems to work fine. I also have a self-compiled Caddy binary which I want to work on a bit more.
I've never used a NAT VPS before. So here are a couple of questions in case anybody has time to give me a hint or two:
Receiving email works great on IPv6, but not on IPv4. I am guessing this is because the port 25 connections are not being forwarded. Is there a way to enable inbound port 25 on IPv4?
Apache2 seems to log IPv6 requests correctly, but seems to be logging all IPv4 requests as originating from the container's gateway. How does one solve this logging problem in the context of MicroLXC? In the following snippet from /etc/apache2/apache2.conf, why is X-Forwarded-For not recommended? Is mod_remoteip appropriate with microlxc's setup?
# Note that the use of %{X-Forwarded-For}i instead of %h is not recommended.
# Use mod_remoteip instead.
Thanks again to @Neoon and @seriesn! Lots of fun! Great project! Great website! High performance! 👍
Comments
Regarding the ongoing issue with failed deployments.
I did manage to narrow it down, sadly it seems like LXD is at fault here.
If you send LXD a container creation request, it simply does not reply always.
But creates the container in the background, which is kinda bad, because it would also mean it can affect reinstalls.
However, you can start another reinstall if the first one fails, since it seems to work on the second try for some reason.
It does not look like a timeout problem or such, as it does not matter if you set the timeout to 60s, LXD just wont answer.
There is a theoretically fix for that, that would kinda duct tape it but I would rather fix it at the core.
I will post again once I fixed it, since is is kinda essential, I have put everything on HOLD for this project.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Maintenance announcement:
SG will be rebooted tomorrow night, to help troubleshoot the ongoing deployment issues.
All Containers will be automatically started after the reboot, it should not take longer than 5 minutes.
NL will be physically moved to another data room next week, more information will follow
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Another Maintenance announcement:
The Plan would be for these locations, to migrate existing containers to a new LVM pool, which should solve these issues.
However, the operation could lead to data loss so I advise anyone if you have a container in one of these locations, take a backup before they will be migrated.
This will take place at the following days:
LA Friday, 16:00 GMT, approximately 1 hour
SG Friday 19:00 GMT, approximately 1 hour
NO Sunday, 19:00 GMT, approximately 2 hours
The Downtime will likely to be shorter for each container, as long nothing comes in-between.
During the maintenance, you won't be able to control the container via microlxc.net.
After the maintenance stock will be available again on these locations, including NO.
Tokyo is not affected by this, however if we upgrade NL and AU, we likely will performance this maintenance additional or if it becomes necessary.
CH will be not moved to another LVM Backend, since I plan to discontinue it, due to the network related issues.
However don't plan to discontinue CH until we have a replacement, currently I am still looking for one.
I keep you updated on this.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
thanks for your updating announcements
"Thursday" not Tuesday, I am sorry for that mistake.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
NL maintenance starting in the next hours, new deployments have been suspended.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
LA maintenance is done, total downtime was 3 minutes + about 1 minute for each container.
Sadly IPv6 died again, we are working on it, so the downtime was a bit higher + a few reboots.
I/O feels a lot faster now, looks good.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Is MicroLXC same as LXC in LDX or mini version? Or you brand it?
Is there GUI tool available over LXC [other than LXDUI] for complete cluster management for newbies [free/paid]?
SG Maintenance is done, LA v6 works again, thanks Virtualizor and thanks @seriesn
@gks No and No.
No idea, I mean LXD has a Rest API, what I do use, and if you use that, you have nearly endless possibilities.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Thanks for the awesome work. I had written a short review of MicroLXC on my blog a few days ago. Added this discussion to keep track of updates.
blog archives
Please tell me what is the Control Panel being used in this project, which is pictured on @vyas' blog page. Thanks!
It's a custom built one.
Is it open source? If yes, where are the sources? Thanks!
blog archives
the issue I face "Configure instance: Failed to mount LVM logical volume: Failed to mount '/dev/secondary/containers_lxccef844a4' on '/var/snap/lxd/common/lxd/storage-pools/secondary/containers/lxccef844a4': no such device or address"
may be it needs some manual review
Cannot deploy first container, I get "You recently deployed a container, please wait."
Every time I stop visiting your website, all of a sudden there’s a content tsunami. When I do visit regularly, it feels like my fridge. Mostly empty.
Y U do dis
Nexus Bytes Ryzen Powered NVMe VPS | NYC|Miami|LA|London|Netherlands| Singapore|Tokyo
Storage VPS | LiteSpeed Powered Web Hosting + SSH access | Switcher Special |
Just for you my friend, just for you. I publish multiple times to irritate you
Now the RSS feed is working again.
Aiming for one new post everyday for the first month. As a moving target, might keep extending it.
blog archives
I disabled lvm tools host again, seems to be causing these issues.
When I was working on the lvm volumes it was suggested to enable the lvm host tools to prevent issues but instead it was causing these.
Please try again, I did try 4 deploys on SG in a row, seems to work fine now.
Additional, I switched the image source to local, should be faster and more reliable on deployments.
The Image server dislikes APAC.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Sadly its not.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Well, the Maintenance did not go by plan, waiting for an IPMI.
Stuff will remain online until the IPMI appears, but I have no ETA when exactly I hope in the next hours.
edit: Maintenance will be done on Monday morning.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
NO Maintenance done, it took a bit longer since I needed to request a IPMI.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
just to continue a conversation from the other thread in a more appropriate place, what sort of specs do you want/need to get a location exclusive to LES users started?
https://inceptionhosting.com
Please do not use the PM system here for Inception Hosting support issues.
Depends, how many users do you expect to use it?
How many resources should each user be able to use?
If you want everyone got get a 1GB or even 2GB VM, the node needs to be equal big, of course you can oversell a bit.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Well I was looking at the plans you offer on microlxc.net, seem quite odd unless you intended to type MB instead of GB on the disk space?
Not sure what the ratio is you find useable on LXC, on VZ6 for LES in the early days 8:1 on ram and 4:1 on disk worked fine without issues.
https://inceptionhosting.com
Please do not use the PM system here for Inception Hosting support issues.
The dot is invisible.
However, I expected at least half a gig and a bit of NVMe storage, no idea make it at least a 8GB KVM, with 70GB NVMe+ should be fine. So we could offer 512MB, 7GB NVMe, oversell it a bit, should fit 20 users easily.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
oh lol
https://inceptionhosting.com
Please do not use the PM system here for Inception Hosting support issues.
NOVOS (Antwerpen) just announced a maintenance for tonight, network will be unreachable for a few seconds up to a few minutes.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Now I see the almost invisible dots! I missed the dots completely the first time around! ?
But I don't yet understand the ratios: 8 something to 1 ram and 4 something to 1 disk. Would you please tell us what is the "something?" Thanks!
This Morning, NL had a emergency maintenance, issues with some switches, this has been solved.
If still face any issues, lemme know.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
0916-d775-1952-03d2
I signed up to see what LXC is all about, and plan to deploy a replica of pushups statibus.
I decided to start a new series of hostnames box0-box9, in addition to the existing series vps0-vps9, to alleviate my "running out of hostnames" issue.
From now on, any free or NAT server will be called boxN, while paid and non-NAT (dedicate IPv4 or only IPv6) will be called vpsN.
This container would be
box0.Gmail is putting "microLXC Code" to the spam folder.
You need MXroute, or at least DKIM signature.
We accept Karma donations for the last flan. 🍮 affbrr
Patch Notes:
*New deployments
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
I recently moved microlxc.net to a new VM running on NVMe + EPYC, let me know if you run into any issues.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
e42b-5a1b-c0fb-0a61
OpenVPN installer | WireGuard installer
Hey, if you're planning to run a VPN on this plan, use @Nyr's installer script. Works great!
?
Have you tried turning it off and on again?Haha, I just wanted to make sure it worked here
OpenVPN installer | WireGuard installer
Does it?
I don't expect it to work on unprivileged lxc containers, they would need to be privileged.
However, wireguard native should work fine, since the kernel module is enabled.
Maybe you can fallback to wireguard at some point.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Thanks for your work, really
It works flawlessly.
Thanks for the free VM
Have you tried turning it off and on again?Nice to hear, that the "VM" works fine.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
True, but sometimes it doesn't matter to the end user (or can't remember) which type of virtualization it is.
Have you tried turning it off and on again?Indeed, most stuff works with LXC out of the box.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
The NL node which the microLXC NL KVM was on, had a hardware failure today.
Since the VM cluster is HA, we only had a downtime of 7 minutes in total, premium.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Sorry for the late response, I did not take a look until today.
Yes, both openvpn-install and wireguard-install work without modification. When running inside containers, the Wireguard installer relies on user space BoringTon so it does not require the kernel module.
PS: very cool service, I will keep my container in Johannesburg!
OpenVPN installer | WireGuard installer
Maintenance Announcement from Nexusbytes on March 27, 2021
Expected maximum downtime per service: 30 minutes
Time: 6:00 P.M to 11:59 P.M (EST)
Affected Locations: Los Angeles and Singapore
All containers will be booted up automagically as usual.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Hello!
eb5c-2dd0-f821-259d
Thank you!
Guys!
I jumped on one of these MicroLXC containers a few days ago after I read in the Cest Pit @Neoon's post that it was MicroLXC's third birthday. 🎂🎂🎂 Thanks to @Neoon for all the work put into the project!
I am on the LA node from @seriesn. Thanks to @seriesn and the other sponsors!
Everything I've tried so far seems to work really great! I think, as somebody who also is selling LXC containers, I am a little bit enabled to appreciate how much work is involved. I have to say, I'd be really glad if people felt that my containers work as well as Neoon's. Plus, @Neoon's gone way further than me with the very cool microlxc.net website.
There are differences in container management between Proxmox, which I am using, and LXD, which @Neoon is using. One difference that I, as a user, noticed is that the initially installed container images are different. At least for Debian, Proxmox's images are older, so they need updating, and quite a bit more software seems to be included in the default install.
Among other uses, I have the idea that my MicroLXC container could function as a backup email receiver (MTA). My primary email receivers are configured to reject emails from servers which fail certain basic tests, such as having reverse DNS set. However, I also like to have backup receivers with a more liberal policy. Everybody makes mistakes, and very occasionally I do see an email I want to receive despite its having been sent from a less than happily configured server. Also, sometimes it can be amusing to read the logs and the headers of spam plus also the ridiculous offers.
I have Apache2 installed in my container, and it seems to work fine. I also have a self-compiled Caddy binary which I want to work on a bit more.
I've never used a NAT VPS before. So here are a couple of questions in case anybody has time to give me a hint or two:
Receiving email works great on IPv6, but not on IPv4. I am guessing this is because the port 25 connections are not being forwarded. Is there a way to enable inbound port 25 on IPv4?
Apache2 seems to log IPv6 requests correctly, but seems to be logging all IPv4 requests as originating from the container's gateway. How does one solve this logging problem in the context of MicroLXC? In the following snippet from /etc/apache2/apache2.conf, why is X-Forwarded-For not recommended? Is mod_remoteip appropriate with microlxc's setup?
Thanks again to @Neoon and @seriesn! Lots of fun!
Great project! Great website! High performance! 👍
@Not_Oles
NanoKVM turned 3, microLXC is about to turn 1 year.
its NAT, so 25 is not forwarded but v6 should work fine
Because your container does terminate the TLS connections, not the HAProxy, means we actually provide end to end encryption. Downside is, that HAProxy does not act as transparent proxy, means origin IP is replaced by the node IP as you see it.
The encrypted packages are routed based on the SNI header.
Tanks
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
All praise to the cat lord @Neoon
Nexus Bytes Ryzen Powered NVMe VPS | NYC|Miami|LA|London|Netherlands| Singapore|Tokyo
Storage VPS | LiteSpeed Powered Web Hosting + SSH access | Switcher Special |
Patch Notes:
Package Updates:
The 512MB Package remains the same.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
where is locations Sir?