Search results

Is the node acting as the gateway for the 192.168.250.0 network? 'when connected to the vpn' - how does a VM or the node 'connect' to the VPN (is there a client app involved?) 'when connected to the vpn' - what does ip route look like?

Not exactly When you install tailscale on a device, it gets an additional special IP beginning with 100 - eg.100.123.45.67 and you use that to connect to -e.g https://100.123.45.67:8006 would be to access the web ui and ssh root@100.123.45.67 but only when you're not on your local network and...

If you install tailscale on your host, then you can access the host remotely - but only the host itself. If you needed to access one of your VM's or LXC containers then you would have to use a console session to that VM on the host. You might want directly access your VM without logging into...

You can install tailscale directly on the host and then you would be able to remotely access the web GUI or SSH terminal. If you wished you could also install directly onto a VM or container to make them directly accessible from your remote client (up to 20 devices on the free plan)

OP is proposing to use EXT4 for SSD and NVME, while creating a ZFS pool on the WD HDD devices. So wearout should not be a major concern apart from log traffic generated by the Proxmox host - assuming the Samsung Evo SSD is the boot/OS drive. I'd suggest the OP considers using LVM over ext4 as...

Some things I'm not clear on are; what does this mean? are the drives on a different host? Is the share mounted on the proxmox host in the storage config? Is the TrueNAS VM in the same subnet as a) the proxmox host b) the Debian VM Is there any mapping between users/groups on the different...

The only way of doing this sensibly is to use VLAN's Might be helpful if you could tell us what you are trying to do and why?

/proc/cmdline BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-5.15.35-1-pve root=ZFS=rpool/ROOT/pve-1 ro root=ZFS=rpool/ROOT/pve-1 boot=zfs quiet intel_iommu=on iommu=pt pcie_acs_override=downstream,multifunction nofb nomodeset video=vesafb:off,efifb:off pretty much the same as yours you can try the rom file, it's only...

It all depends on how resource intensive each VM is going to be. My system has 12 cores/24 threads and in total I have 32 cores allocated to running VM's and containers and the system barely breaks a sweat with the average CPU load on the host being below 10% However, none of my VM's run...

I'm using the same video card as you 03:00.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: NVIDIA Corporation GF100GL [Quadro 4000] [10de:06dd] (rev a3) Subsystem: Hewlett-Packard Company GF100GL [Quadro 4000] [103c:0780] Kernel driver in use: vfio-pci Kernel modules: nvidiafb...

probably your best solution would be to use an sftp client like the one built into https://www.bitvise.com/ssh-client This would allow you upload and download files to-and-from pve host to client on a local network

The thing to remember for a VM with passthrough enabled is that whatever RAM you allocate is 100% reserved for that VM - while the same doesn't apply for a normal VM where the RAM allocation is more dynamic and any unused RAM can be shared with the host and/or other VM's depending on what each...

Not suggesting this would be the cause, but I wonder if allocating 16 cpu cores and 32GB of ram to a single VM is really needed? How many cpu cores and how much RAM does the host actually have?

I believe the tg3 driver is buggy on Linux, I've seen comments that disabling IOMMU on the host (if it's enabled) helps

probably you will find the name of your network devices has changed with the upgrade what is the output of ip link show

# network interface settings; autogenerated # Please do NOT modify this file directly, unless you know what # you're doing. # # If you want to manage parts of the network configuration manually, # please utilize the 'source' or 'source-directory' directives to do # so. # PVE will preserve these...

Is the card in a server chassis - like dell/hp or supermicro? those cards do run hot and need adequate cooling to be reliable

Your WAN and LAN should not be on the same network - change the WAN network - e.g 192.168.100.1/24 (and update your iptable rules to use 192.168.100.0/24) Also, in pfsense - check "Interfaces->WAN:reserved networks" and verify the "Block private networks and loopback addresses" is not enabled...

I would suspect a corrupted arp table. If there's a next time, try clearing the arp table first. arp -c -a from the pfsense shell I think will do it.

also HP branded RAID controllers don't tend to be ZFS friendly - which controller is installed?