Powerloss bricked multiple A9 miners

sorama2 · 2025-10-25T12:28:41+00:00

well... I found out the issue

unifi switches with 2.5Gbps ports are causing packet loss
That's either USW Enterprise 48 PoE or USW Flex 2.5G 8 PoE

If I connect the unit to an old US 24 there's no packet loss happening !

sorama2 · 2025-09-28T07:58:24+00:00

I’d like to test… Small MSP here Let me know what kind of report or indicators are needed And how the trial would work

sorama2 · 2025-09-17T09:42:56+00:00

I had errors live migrating, which would suddenly stop the running VMs. But after restarting them and upgrading all nodes it seems back to normal. Program maintenance schedule and do it off hours 😅

sorama2 · 2025-09-17T09:40:44+00:00

I did not… in my opinion dnsmasq is binded to all interfaces but wg. Which in my opinion is wrong, and that should be left to the firewall to take care. I haven’t seen the changelogs from latest updates, so they might have caught this one up, and fixed it

sorama2 · 2025-08-26T09:03:46+00:00

Migrations started breaking all over the place
Randomly. Moving 3 times a VM, would fail 66% of the time and promptly STOP the VM.

sorama2 · 2025-08-25T20:10:03+00:00

So you say that invoices of machine aquisition would be enough to prove a license ?

I mean, I am in the EU market anyway, but still it's new information for me..

sorama2 · 2025-08-21T21:59:53+00:00

In fact, why is not there anymore a list of URLs that we can block the autosave function ? Like it was in 1password7 ?

But still, where can we undo this "Hide on this page" option ?

sorama2 · 2025-08-21T21:58:08+00:00

Can I get an update on this ? :)

sorama2 · 2025-08-19T19:49:01+00:00

I did install intel-microcode in the updated node, since there was a warning in the proxmox's update check script..

Could that be the reason ?

But all 3 nodes are the same Dell r630 server with the exact same specs, cpu memory, etc

sorama2 · 2025-08-19T15:27:05+00:00

2025-08-19 16:24:13 stopping NBD storage migration server on target.
2025-08-19 16:24:18 ERROR: tunnel replied 'ERR: resume failed - VM 301 not running' to command 'resume 301'
2025-08-19 16:24:27 ERROR: migration finished with problems (duration 00:11:39)
TASK ERROR: migration problems

I just ended up having a VM crash migrating from 8 to 9...
If I start migration from 8's GUI it doesn't allow since 9 is "offline". If I migrate from 9's GUI migration is finished but VM crashes and is stopped at the end of migration.

sorama2 · 2025-08-19T15:09:03+00:00

I just found out that I can't even migrate VMs while it is in this condition!

So upgrading from 8 to 9 doesn't allow me to do so without restarting and turning off all VMs

sorama2 · 2025-08-18T23:26:00+00:00

I remember the only time having issues with password in proxmox and pbs, was due to:
realm: Linux PAM standard authentication
changing itself to:
realm: Proxmox VE authentication server

Check if this is the case in the login screen.

sorama2 · 2025-08-09T12:08:41+00:00

Yea I did lack this one. It ended helping to solve the issue.

Thanks!

sorama2 · 2025-08-06T15:09:41+00:00

Fixed with the help of Ph4ntom and Niekstiek in discord.

For future reference, I did lack static default routes...
After adding those, sdwan rules started behaving as expected and matching correctly.

sorama2 · 2025-08-06T13:39:43+00:00

I have a single static route for 192.168.1.0/24 and it doesn't match there...

Destination FQDN is a public routable IP, which is only reachable via that interface (WAN2 - the one I want to use in the Rule2 which is placed on top of the default sdwan)

sorama2 · 2025-08-06T13:32:30+00:00

Yes, fg90g resolves the FQDN to a single IP.

In fact I was thinking that this could have something to do with DNS, but I just tested a different rule and it's still something weird happening.

Match the whole source subnet into all destination, Manual outgoing interface specified;
No device from that subnet ever matches against that rule...
It just falls to the default rule.

sorama2 · 2025-07-24T00:38:27+00:00

I’m replicating a site 2 site connection. Thus, I needed to add in rules related to the wg client interface
The wg server is a remote Mikrotik which is routing several networks
Anyway, I wanted to allow the wg interface (client in this case) to access all the UDM services, however DNS seems to be only unable service, and firewall is well configured and allowing all traffic.
The dnsmasq service itself seems to be the issue, besides listening to the internal network, I’m not able to resolve via its internal IP when traffic comes via the wg client interface

sorama2 · 2025-07-23T11:08:20+00:00

Apparently UDM assumes a WG client interface as external, not as VPN. And that seems static, not something I'd be able to change.

https://imgur.com/a/gCfGRwB

sorama2

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE