Selfhosted

60048 readers

728 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:

Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam.
Posts here are to be centered around self-hosting. Please ensure it is clear in your post how it relates to self-hosting.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or git here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title.
No trolling.

Resources:

selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
awesome-selfhosted software
awesome-sysadmin resources
Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

curbstickle@anarchist.nexus

curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world

119

Selfhosting Sunday! What's up? (lemmy.nocturnal.garden)

submitted 8 months ago by tofu@lemmy.nocturnal.garden to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

113 comments fedilink hide all child comments

What's happening on your servers? Any interesting news things you tried?

I didn't do anyone other than updating Mastodon (native deployment) lately due to a lack of time. Reading so much about Immich caused me to consider trying it in parallel to Nextcloud but I'm not sure if I want to have everything twice.

Not quite homelab, but I'm about to install Linux Mint on my mom's laptop and that had me thinking about creating an off-site backup in her place again since she has a fiber connection. I'm still not sure about the potential design though, but currently my only backup is in the same rack as the live stuff.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

the implication of that is weird to me. I'm not saying that the horse is wrong, but thats such a non-standard solution. That's implementing a CGNAT restriction without the benefits of CGNAT. They would need to only allow internal to external connections unless the connection was already established. How does standard communication still function if it was that way, I know that would break protocols like basic UDP, since that uses a fire and forget without internal prompting.

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

It's perfectly reasonable from the perspective of corporate scum: take away a standard feature, then sell it back as an extra. As far as I know, the modem still had UPnP for applications that rely on it.