Search results

Hi, post the result of the command. Best regards,

Hi, Agree. But other solution than public wildcard exists to use in envrionnement when the PVE are not expected to be reachable from the internet and are in a closed network. If the "fear" is only the browser warning because it's a self-signed versus giving OSINT data for bad actors (the point...

Hi, well, you said this : So that is why, with your existing license, the best is to do 16+8 (x2) that leave you 16 for a third node, or you can do 3 nodes with 16 cores; it all depends on your budget, the number of windows VMs and the load that you’re expecting on your nodes. yes Best regards,

Hi, Well, he shouldn't have, if you have 3 license for 16 core, you can assign license only to one host you cannot split the 16 cores between 2 different host (I think it's explicated in Microsoft docs). For your use case I would use one 16 core + one 8core, so like that you have your 24 cores...

Hi, Technically speaking the license are per host, so your license should cover 2 hosts with 24 cores (and no you cannot split like you did, you should have 4 licenses). And technically speaking you can only licence your node which are used to host windows VMs. Source : profesionnal experience...

Hi, Never said this VM should be on the hypervisor, just put this on separate hardware (just common sense at this point). i never said it's dangerous. My point it's just dumb to use public providers to generate a certificate to use it on lan-only infra. On our infra we use, the certificate...

Hi, Sorry I don't see the issue. Many tools/Ways exist to do this even in non-domain network. Few examples : - Bastion VM -> Only this VM can access hypervisor infrastructure (and session can be monitored/registered) and has the certificate trusted - Software to manage computers, like WAPT...

Hi, In that case, why use public CA, it's better to use internal CA which are not known from the internet. If you don't want to publicly "leak" data, why using public infrastructure ? Best regards,

Hi, what is your exact version of PVE ? Best regards,

Hi, Have you check you had the latest version, it's been fixed with last updates. Best regards,

Hi, Well, with no real data we cannot help you, you need to give all the information. What is your IP, gateway, netmask, host file, resolv.conf, router IP (which should the gateway), hyper-v network config, etc. (preferably in text base with code balise tag rather than screenshot) Best regards,

Hi, Can you explain more and what you are trying to do exactly ? Here from my point you try to access another LAN without routing between the LAN so yeah it will not work like that by "magic". Note : quoting whole message is useless Best regards,

Hi, Huh, pve does not set a proxy. I don't know what you are trying, but can you respond to the questions and tell what you are already done as diagnostic and what are the results ? Best regards,

Hi, Do you ping your router ? If not you should look at your router security, maybe he doesn’t authorize static IP inside it's DHCP pool and then block that IP. Best regards,

Hi, From what I can see of your screenshot, you are running proxmox inside a hyper-v VM ? Have you checked your hyper-v settings ? Best regards,

Hi, You should open your thread and give more details about your setup. Best regards,

Hi, to display the file you need to use a command, for example cat cat /etc/network/interfaces Best regards,

Hi, What is your storage configuration ? Best regards,

Hi, It's a hardware issue, not a proxmox specific issue (same appear on vmware or other OS), if anyone should talk about this issue is miniforum, the hardware vendor, just like asrockind (Cf : https://www.asrockind.com/en-gb/index.php?route=newsblog/faq&faq_id=91). Or just use enterprise grade...

Hi, I know it's a consumer hardware/computer, not a server. When you tried this, the "other" has the same L2 connection as the proxmox server ? Well, I don't know your background, but I know that the same setup is working in my case, so I know that it's not simply a bug in proxmox (and you...