User avatar
Norm (ノーム) CastoriceBlushing @norm@shrimp.biribiri.dev
3w
people who host publicly-facing servers at home (not on a VPS), do you just directly use your home IP address w/ port forwarding or use a tunnel to a VPS (or a service like CF tunnels) with a reverse proxy?
directly host on IP 14 votes45%tunnel to VPS 13 votes41%other 4 votes12%
31 users voted
:black_sparkling_heart@fire.asta.lgbt:1
11
5
4
1
User avatar
mirabilos @mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org
2w
@norm wdym port forwarding for ?
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Norm (ノーム) CastoriceBlushing @norm@shrimp.biribiri.dev
2w
@mirabilos I mean like just hosting directly off your home connection's public IP. I know port forwarding isn't strictly necessary with IPv6, but I'd imagine some people are on IPv4 only setups where you do have to deal with NAT
1
0
0
0
User avatar
mirabilos @mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org
2w
@norm yes, I do that, but the home server does the NAT for v4 for the devices on LAN, so…
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Norm (ノーム) CastoriceBlushing @norm@shrimp.biribiri.dev
2w
@mirabilos not sure what you're asking about then...
1
0
0
0
User avatar
mirabilos @mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org
2w
@norm there is no NAT or port forwarding for the services
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Norm (ノーム) CastoriceBlushing @norm@shrimp.biribiri.dev
2w
@mirabilos I mean well there would be NAT/port forward on v4 unless you somehow have multiple v4 external IPs
1
0
0
0
User avatar
mirabilos @mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org
2w
@norm no, there is no port forward on v4, the PPPoE terminates directly in the home server
2
0
1
0
User avatar
mirabilos @mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org
2w
@norm you’d only need port forwarding if you had one of those stupid cheap plastic routers in between, which is a good thing to get rid of
1
0
0
0
User avatar
Norm (ノーム) CastoriceBlushing @norm@shrimp.biribiri.dev
2w
@mirabilos I do think there's still a usecase for a separate router from a server, but I do agree with ditching consumer-grade routers or the ISP provided stuff
1
0
0
0
User avatar
mirabilos @mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org
2w
@norm if the server is either running all the time or cheap enough power-wise to keep running all the time, I’ll argue it makes a better router anyway since you can run BSD with a proper firewall on it and are much better network-wise than with a separate router
1
0
1
0
User avatar
Norm (ノーム) CastoriceBlushing @norm@shrimp.biribiri.dev
2w
@mirabilos fair enough, I kinda like having the two separate in case my server stuff goes down for some reason
1
0
1
0
User avatar
mirabilos @mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org
2w
@norm fair, though in my experience it’s the Fritzbox stuff that goes down much more often ;)
1
0
1
0
User avatar
Norm (ノーム) CastoriceBlushing @norm@shrimp.biribiri.dev
2w
@mirabilos hence the "ditching [...] ISP equipment" in the other reply neocat_wink_blep
1
0
1
0
User avatar
mirabilos @mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org
2w
@norm Fritzbox stuff is what people bought here for decades to ditch ISP stuff…
2
0
0
0
User avatar
mirabilos @mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org
2w
@norm (ofc now some bundle those instead, but not all)
0
0
1
0
User avatar
Norm (ノーム) CastoriceBlushing @norm@shrimp.biribiri.dev
2w
@mirabilos the ISP stuff must be really bad if that is considered an upgrade...
2
0
1
0
User avatar
Norm (ノーム) CastoriceBlushing @norm@shrimp.biribiri.dev
2w
@mirabilos (then again people here buy TP-Link Decos and amazon eeros to replace ISP routers...)
0
0
1
0
User avatar
mirabilos @mirabilos@toot.mirbsd.org
2w
@norm oh it is, even some people from the same telco say so
0
0
1
0
User avatar
Norm (ノーム) CastoriceBlushing @norm@shrimp.biribiri.dev
2w
@mirabilos I mean I suppose you could do that, but I would imagine most wouldn't do that
0
0
0
0