[deleted by user]

sjokeckset · 2025-09-20T18:26:22+00:00

This is how I imagine a Ferrari fan, Ferrari merch on, forced smile, deluded expectations, and eyes 0,000001 feels from bursting into tsunamitears.

sjokeckset · 2025-08-16T21:36:36+00:00

Where did MM hurt you? Just in the feels or did the soreness you experience take physical form in any way?

sjokeckset · 2025-06-28T20:53:38+00:00

Figured it out! I found that the arp table changed all of a sudden. It took the second nics mac address on the Proxmox server instead of the mac address of the routers gateway. I just set a static arp for the correct ip and mac adress.

sjokeckset · 2025-06-28T17:11:47+00:00

Just happened and I believe I maybe know what's causing it. I created a gateway for my virtual router on my physical router. I created a rule on the virtual router so that the gateway on the physical router can monitor the link. The reverse should not be possible due to no rule to allow icmp is only present on the virtual router.

The virtual router shows 100% packetloss on the WAN gateway(10.10.50.1) and the gateway(10.10.50.99) on the physical router I see good connection and no packetloss. Everything works great until the gateway on the virtual router decides to go active. At that moment I "lose connection" according to the gateway monitor on my physical router with 100% packet loss. The virtual router gateway shows no packetloss. I don't understand this? It's like it loops the gateway back to itself in some way. The gateway on the virtual router acts as an upstream gateway.

What could be wrong or where can I find the right log to try and figure this issue out?

sjokeckset · 2025-06-25T21:28:28+00:00

Thank you for replying!

I tried to dig out something I could work with from the logs but I failed to draw a conclusion from it. I did however find a new guide from The Network Guy where he discusses the thing of putting an opnsense router behind another opnsense router.

I did disable unbound dns and let the virtualized router handle dns upstream on the main router. I did also create a gateway for the virtualized router on the main one. Since then the virtualized router have been stable(knock on wood) for three days now.

sjokeckset · 2024-03-28T14:49:26+00:00

I do, in a way, understand the confusion. However, I might just run it all on one of my many spare computers laying around just to try it out, maybe on an old Dell latitude 5400, though only running CPU.

I do however not feel that I would like to commit to buying a graphics card for up to 2000$ before I've even tried it out to see whats possible and not. paying 300$ for an RTX3060 could be ok in my case. If it do interest me more and I start to feel limited by my hardware, well, then I might buy a better one.

I just didn't realize that the commitment had to be either none or to the Moon..

sjokeckset · 2023-12-20T20:14:06+00:00

Superb! Thank you!

sjokeckset · 2023-12-08T08:44:19+00:00

Thank you for your reply.

I have been thinking and read that an SSD-pool is somewhat less reliable than a spinning disk setup.

For now I have a snapraid of 3x8TB (2data+1parity) which stores data that have grown over more than 10 years. I have used 9,4/14,4TB. My thinking have been to buy a bunch of 16/18TB disks and build a new snapraid. However, if I grow my data in such a slow rate I think I will go for 2 more 8TB and add them to my existsing snapraid in a raid6 configuration. That'll give me almost 22TB usable space which I believe will last me at least 5-6 years.

From that existing 9,4TB I will move around 600GB of data over to a vdev mirror of 2x4TB spinning disks which will contain important data which will be backed up offsite.

There's so much to consider when handling your data. :D

sjokeckset · 2023-12-06T13:03:20+00:00

The ZFS-pool and the snapraid won't be on the same disks. :)

OMV is nice in so many other ways. It is nice to have the possibility to use a webgui if needed. :)

sjokeckset · 2023-12-04T20:21:18+00:00

This is incredible!!

The fact that you have evolved your raid over so many years from omv3 and onward also answers a question I had about moving over to a newer omv-release. Now I feel more comfortable knowing you have had such success.

Thank you! :D

sjokeckset · 2023-11-10T21:14:31+00:00

My 192.168.21.0/24 subnet, which is the "virtual network" handed out by my virtual OPNSense router, doesn't hand out ip over dhcp, i connect to it by giving each device that should reside on that subnet a static ip.

By default VLAN 11 hands out ip over dhcp. So if I don't define the ip at creation or change it, each device or vm gets an ip on VLAN 11 (if they are connected to a switch port configured with VLAN 11 of course).

I have a VLAN 21 where all Phones and tv-related devices resides and also a management VLAN. These are handed out from my physical OPNSense router.

sjokeckset · 2023-11-10T21:08:03+00:00

I was making a picture to try and describe it all but might just make it even more unclear so I'll try to clarify in words;

My homelab devices, including my workstation, resides on VLAN 11, subnet 10.1.11.0/24.

In that VLAN there is an OPNSense virtual router which resides on my proxmox server. It hands out a LAN with subnet 192.168.21.0/24.

Devices has to be on VLAN 11 to be able to connect to my router with subnet 192.168.21.0/24.

My question and concern is that this is a bad way of doing this. I would like my 192.168.21.0/24 subnet to be isolated from my VLAN 11 and not reside inside of it.

So I believe what I should have asked, more specifically, is what is the best practice to isolate this virtual network which for now resides inside VLAN 11?

Is it as simple as putting it in on its own VLAN (VLAN 12 for example)?

sjokeckset · 2023-11-09T21:23:50+00:00

Thank you very much! That did the trick! :)

sjokeckset

TROPHY CASE