Kalcifer

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago to Lemmy in I think that it would be good to mirror the Lemmy repositories to a FOSS alternative (e.g. Codeberg)

extra work that serves no purpose whatsoever.

No purpose? I outlined the main rationale in my post, and this comment followed up with more detail.

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago to Lemmy in I think that it would be good to mirror the Lemmy repositories to a FOSS alternative (e.g. Codeberg)

Indeed! But, I think that it would be preferable for it to be handled officially.

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago (edited 5 months ago) to Lemmy in I think that it would be good to mirror the Lemmy repositories to a FOSS alternative (e.g. Codeberg)

It’s actually already mirrored to Codeberg

My mistake! I swear that I did check before I posted this! I must've improperly searched for it, or somehting, because I really don't remember seeing it when I looked.

it seems the devs haven’t pushed the changes for a couple of months.

Indeed, that seems to be the case. I wonder why?

EDIT (2024-01-19T00:45):

I think that I found what I did "wrong", initially: I searched for "Lemmy" under "Repositories" on Codeberg (which didn't display the Lemmy repos), where I should've searched under "Organizations". Personally, I feel that this is a bit of a UX issue on Codebergs end; the main search should be a fuzzy search with options to fliter afterwards.

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago to homelab in Does Avahi work over a bridged network?

Wait, are you just generally referring to this? That already exists in the form of PPPoE, and, for all intents and purposes, WPA, does it not?

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago to homelab in Does Avahi work over a bridged network?

This works if B has an interface that is connected to the A subnet

I'm not sure I understand exactly what you mean. Is it not given that if two routers are connected to each other then an interface from either of them will be connected to the other?

but not if you have a PtP between the two routers

What do you mean by PtP? Are you referring to something like WDS, or, in my case, relayd?

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago to homelab in Does Avahi work over a bridged network?

Afaik, an mDNS reflector is only needed to cross subnets -- both subnets and mDNS function on layer 3. Bridging occurs on layer 2, and since mDNS functions in layer 3 (ipv4 multicast is layer 3), the bridge itself is invisible to it.

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago to homelab in [WORKAROUND] Nextcloud portforward stops working when it is moved to a bridged network

I'm now encountering another issue where I can't ping any external IP's. I don't mean that DNS isn't resolving (I set that on Router B to use Router A as the DNS resolver), but the I can't ping, say, google.com, for example, from a device on Router B. I can see the ICMP requests in Wireshark, but they just say "no response".

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago to homelab in [WORKAROUND] Nextcloud portforward stops working when it is moved to a bridged network

Hrm, I still have the same issue. Here's the firewall settings:

lan zone:

• Input: accept
• Output: accept
• Forward: accept
• Masquerading: false (unchecked)
• MSS clamping: false (unchecked)
• Covered Networks: lan
• Allow forward to destination zones: wan, wan6, wwan
• Allow forward from source zones: unspecified

wan zone:

• Input: accept
• Output: accept
• Forward: accept
• Masquerading: false (unchecked)
• MSS clamping: true (checked)
• Covered Networks: wan, wan6, wwan
• Allow forward to destination zones: unspecified
• Allow forward from source zones: lan

EDIT: I didn't see your edit, as I hadn't refreshed the page.

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago to homelab in [WORKAROUND] Nextcloud portforward stops working when it is moved to a bridged network

Ok, so, I'm ending up with an issue where I can ping Router A from a device on Router B, but I get Destination Port Unreachable if I try to ping a device on Router A. Likewise, I can ping Router B from a device on Router A, but I get Destination Port Unreachable if I try to ping a device on Router B.

I have the route added to Router A (192.168.1.0/24 via 192.168.0.2), I have masquerading turned off for wan on Router B.

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago to homelab in [WORKAROUND] Nextcloud portforward stops working when it is moved to a bridged network

Alright, I'll give your suggestion a go.

Make B have its own subnet, say, 192.168.1.0/24, assuming that A is on 192.168.0.0/24. Enable DHCP and everything, it’s now it’s own full network.

Done.

Make B a client of A with a static IP, like 192.168.0.2. That makes B present on A’s network.

Done.

Add a route on A for B’s network: 192.168.1.0/24 via 192.168.0.2.

I think I set this right: Network->Routing->Add->(Interface: wwan, Route type: unicast, Target: 192.168.0.1/24, Gateway: 192.168.1.1)

Disable NAT on B, just set A as the default route.

How would I go about doing this? I can't find any definitive information on how to disable NAT in OpenWRT.

The only thing missing would be to handle broadcasts so stuff like Bonjour/Avahi works correctly.

I do need this. I believe this would then require an mDNS reflector, right (it wasn't required before as relayd was bridging the networks)?

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago to homelab in [WORKAROUND] Nextcloud portforward stops working when it is moved to a bridged network

That’s… interesting. Router B shouldn’t be involved at all with this, it should be blindly forwarding the packets. That’s a layer 3 error!

Indeed! I'm quite stumped.

How’s the bridge set up?

I set it up using this guide.

Have you made sure router B doesn’t do DHCP [...]?

Yup, it's disabled.

Have you made sure router B [...] doesn’t take the IP of router A by accident?

Yep, it's set to be static.

Kalcifer OP , 5 months ago to homelab in Does Avahi work over a bridged network?

Router B is bridging Device B to Router A's network, so they aren't on separate vlans; thus, it shouldn't require an mDNS reflector as that repeats mDNS between separate subnets.

Kalcifer , 5 months ago to Linux in Linux Ubuntu Dual-booting horror

I encourage you to read through this Archwiki page on dualbooting -- it has a lot of very helpful information on the topic.

I was originally hoping to do it this way and be able to dual boot them, but the more I think about it the more I feel that just going straight to Linux and biting the bullet would be better in the long run, and I can flash Windows if I really need it.

It is certainly possible to dual boot (in my experience, with the occasional headache that you may, or may not be willing to deal with) Windows and Linux, but yes, the most reliable installation would be one, or the other.

I was trying to get GRUB to act as boot loader but for the longest time I couldn’t even get GRUB running, even with at least 5 different troubleshooting ideas

Hrm, I'm not sure how you are going about your installation procedure. You mentioned that you are installing Ubuntu, but Ubuntu should come with Grub pre packaged. Installing Ubuntu really only requires clicking a couple buttons in the install wizard.

but I figured out how to get Linux desktop running via shimx64.efi in the BIOS boot loader.

Im not really familiar with shim, but, from what I understand, it's the loader for when you have secure boot enabled, but you should have that disabled.

Kalcifer , 5 months ago to Linux in Linux Ubuntu Dual-booting horror

I don't fully understand how you are going about your installation. Are you attempting to install Windows 10, and Ubuntu onto different partitions on one drive, or each on a separate drive? Are you wanting to use grub to boot the OS of choice, or to choose the boot device from the BIOS boot device menu? In what order did you initially install the OS's (Windows 10 first, then Ubuntu, or vice-versa)?