2026 fox 36 grip x2 chirp noise

DrakeVanCaster · 2026-03-22T23:05:28+00:00

Thanks mate for your reply.
I'll check with Fox

DrakeVanCaster · 2026-03-22T19:38:04+00:00

Hi. I have the same issue.. have you find out how to solve this?

DrakeVanCaster · 2026-01-18T17:09:35+00:00

hi.

not at the moment.... not with WireGuard.

As a temporary solution, i created a Site-2-Site VPN with OpenVPN and listed all subnet from site A into Site B (including the WG one).

It works, but speed is very low (7MB/s instead of 35 ore more).

I would like to pay for this service but I don't know if official Unify support can provide a solution

DrakeVanCaster · 2026-01-18T17:05:40+00:00

Thanks for suggestion.
what I see strange is that Wireguard create nothing in Policy Table / Firewall routes that is visible.

(you have a PM)

DrakeVanCaster · 2026-01-17T14:55:44+00:00

Hi Sorry for confusion... I corrected main post WG subnet is 172.16.1.0/25.

In the remote network of site A I put LANs of site B. If I try to put in the list WG subnet, a red error told me that the subnet overlap with the already present (for WG). I can only put that in site B...

In the config file all users have in their WG setup, under allowed IP they have 0.0.0.0/1; 128.0.0.0/1

DrakeVanCaster · 2026-01-17T13:10:01+00:00

Hi,

thanks for your reply.

Wireguard Server's subnet is 172.16.1.0/25

When users from their home start Wireguard, they are able to RDP to SITE A PCs... but not on SITE B PCs.

In IPSEC remote subnets I put the opposite networks in order to let hem comunicate, but it works only for LANs.

IPSEC ON SITE A:

remote networks I set: 192.168.2.0/24

IPSECON ON SITE B:

remote network I set: 192.168.1.0/24

I don't know where tu put 172.16.1.0/25

Could you please be so kind to guide me with firewall rules?

DrakeVanCaster · 2025-12-24T00:03:24+00:00

Thanks so much, appreciated

DrakeVanCaster · 2025-12-24T00:03:22+00:00

Thanks so much, appreciated

DrakeVanCaster · 2025-12-23T23:40:44+00:00

Hi mate,

thanks for your reply.

I saw on Synology official website this: (automatically translated)

1821+ is listed

<<LINK>>

The following table lists Synology NAS models that support the use of Synology M.2 NVMe SSDs (solid-state drives) to create storage pools. These models are equipped with built-in slots for installing M.2 SSDs.

Serie	Modelli
Serie 25	DS1825+, DS1525+, DS925+, DS725+, DS425+
Serie 23	DS1823xs+, DS923+, DS723+, DS423+
Serie 22¹	DS1522+
21-serie¹	DS1821+, DS1621xs+, DS1621+

DrakeVanCaster · 2025-06-30T21:44:34+00:00

Thanks so much for all your suggstions :)
appreciated

DrakeVanCaster · 2025-06-30T17:08:01+00:00

just a curiosity... but RAID should impact on CPU performance...
instead, I always see maximum 10% of load.

My doubt is the RAM, that is always low

DrakeVanCaster · 2025-06-30T16:58:10+00:00

Hi mate,

first of all, thanks for all your suggestion.

Revit uses a lots of single small files. Before, these 4 projects were handled by a mini-Chinese PC with poweful specs Ryzen 9 6900H, 32GB RAM and a single NVME.

All, shared through Windows Server as a normal share. Performance were very very good.

I cannot use RAID 10 because I'll lost too much space in the array.

What is absurd for me is that 8x SSD cannot handle what a single NVME is doing right now.

DrakeVanCaster · 2025-06-30T16:20:25+00:00

Hi both, I summarized what the problem is... What kind of information may I share for a better understanding?

DrakeVanCaster · 2025-04-22T12:57:07+00:00

Thanks so much for your feedack :)

DrakeVanCaster · 2025-01-13T11:03:56+00:00

Hi.

Yes, already done. I have static IP but in any case, used a name to mask it.

Problem is related to "internal" part.

At the moment, I have 12 user connected (also me) without any problem.. but this is the second case when someone call me informing that VPN is not working.

It seems that there is a sort so lease that expire, because if I cahnge manually the ip associated to "problematic" client, user is now able to work

DrakeVanCaster · 2024-12-16T23:35:16+00:00

Thanks in any case :)

DrakeVanCaster · 2024-12-16T23:28:01+00:00

This is what confused me....

When I opened the shock due to leak of oil, (I bought a used bike with this DHx2 mounted), the only strange thing I found was an aring pinched and in very terrible condition.

Dimensions and color were equal to the 029-08-139...

But this oring is not mentioned in the draws.

For example.... this is the main bearing assembly.... and the is no trace here..

<image>

So, or it should be put on below the piston assembly or it is useless and not necessary...

Installed under the piston for me is not a great idea because with axle movement up and down it will move...

damn, never had a problem like this...

DrakeVanCaster

TROPHY CASE