Search results

Sure. Relevant Part (excluded are the DMZ Zones which will be managed by OPNSense) and of course redacted IP for Privacy. auto lo iface lo inet loopback # Disabled the "auto" Part #auto eth0 iface eth0 inet manual auto vmbr0 iface vmbr0 inet static hwaddress XXXXXXXXXXXXXX address...

Well, with all due respect, that is "his/her Problem" and/or (most likely) some weird Stuff going on on the part of Hetzner. Personally I don't want that they take my Server Down because their Server (plus possibly my Server) was badly configured. Would you accept that ? And, at the same time...

Not sure if it helps, but you might want to check my reply and @Undergrid Firewall Rule. In my case the First Abuse was originally automatically solved, just to come back a few days later + manual Reply saying that they would block my server within a few hours if the Problem was not solved...

So I also added your rule (see my EDIT 3 ... I had to create a Rule Set "NOT MY IPs" with "nomatch" enabled. Too bad we cannot do this when creating the Firewall Rule, like I could e.g. with OPNSense ("Invert the sense of the Match"), as then I need to create "MY PUBLIC IPs", "NOT MY PUBLIC...

I have bridged networking as well ... Good point, I'll also add that rule :) . EDIT 1: and Hetzner again complained that I did not reply tho their automatic request (because when I clicked they stated that the ticket was already closed). Doesn't make sense ... EDIT 2: how did you "Invert...

So ... I got yet another MAC Abuse warning, this time coupled by a human response, after I inquired about what was going on, since the IP Address related to those MAC Addresses were NOT mine. They told me that the Server could be locked down in a few hours and to contact Customer Support if...

I'm on the latest and greatest Proxmox VE 8.2.2. The only thing I did to try to improve the situation AFTER this Abuse Alert was to add this to /etc/sysctl.d/99-hetzner.conf: # Ignore ICMP echo packets sent to a broadcast address. net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_broadcasts=1 # This setting avoids...

I also just received an Abuse message. But when running `tcpdump -en | grep -i <mac-address-they-say-its-not-allowed>` I get the IP Address of ANOTHER Hetzner Server, NOT Mine ! Did they send the Abuse message to everybody in the /26 Subnet (I have a single IP Address) ?

Yeah but I'd rather not replace the disks if it's not really needed. It's also $$$. It's not like it was "real" used space. It was probably caused by ZFS doing snapshots on top of snapshots or compression on top of compression. Do you think there are other features I should disable on the ZFS...

A) The Pool would fill up anyways ... For 70GB used inside the guest, it would accumulate 700GB (!!!) of used space on the HOST. Now it's "only" using 181GB .... A1) No extra bay capacity B) I'm getting confused ... All the space / disk on the HOST is occupied by ZFS, there is no space for...

What problem ... Right now ... none I guess ... except possibly user error deleting a whole dataset/Container inside the VM or something. Going forward probably backups (using sanoid + syncoid) but not there yet ... I plan to use Proxmox Backup Server (PBS) in the future but as I said ... not...

@fiona : the only possible reason, but I cannot be 100% sure about it since I don't remember the exact timing of events, is that I ran a Proxmox VE Update/Upgrade before-during-after (cannot remember exactly now :() I was doing the modifications inside that VM. Maybe that, at reboot of the VM...

As peer the title, I have a host (running Podman/Docker Containers) that is periodically hitting 100% ZFS Pool Usage due to the Snapshots that keep getting created automatically on the Host. I enabled TRIM on the GUEST ZFS Pool (yes ... I'm running ZFS in the GUEST on top of a ZVOL that Proxmox...

It's standalone ... But I believe Proxmox VE automatically runs a cluster anyways, even if there is a single node. root@pve16:~# mount -l | grep pve /dev/fuse on /etc/pve type fuse (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,default_permissions,allow_other) root@pve16:~# zpool history |...

Here is the Config: root@pve16:~# qm config 105 balloon: 0 boot: order=scsi0;ide2;net0 cores: 2 cpu: host ide2: none,media=cdrom memory: 4096 meta: creation-qemu=8.1.5,ctime=1714410786 name: DC2 net0: virtio=BC:24:11:A4:EA:7E,bridge=vmbr0,firewall=1 numa: 1 onboot: 1 ostype: l26 scsi0...

I am a bit dumbfounded with 2 Debian VMs on 2 different Proxmox VE Hosts. The boot process seems stuck as in the screenshot above. No matter how many times I refresh the page, the NoVNC Console always displays this useless page and I cannot do anything. However ... I could ssh and perform...

Not sure how relevant it is but this is my experience after struggling A LOT with these almost random issues. Note however that this is for a DATASET, NOT A ZVOL ! lsof unfortunately never worked for me troubleshooting ZFS busy issues ... # Dataset to be destroy DATASET="zdata/PODMAN-TEST" #...

I was facing the same problem (usually solved through backing everything up via zfs send | zfs receive remotely, recreating the partition layout & zpool, and restoring through zfs send | zfs receive remotely in reverse). I discovered that the wrong line in /boot/grub/grub.cfg is actually added...

I recently upgraded Proxmox VE from 7.x to 8.x alongside a Debian Bullseye -> Debian Bookworm Upgrade. On some systems however, it gets stuck at boot. The only thing I can see over Remote Management / IPMI is, using Kernel 6.5.11-7-pve: Any ideas on how to debug further ? Kernel...

That's unfortunate. I solved this the "easy" way by bifurcating the PCIe slot to x8x8 instead of x4x4x4x4. This way, since 2 devices are installed (in M.2 slot #1 and #3, so that each falls in a separate x8 slot), no "empty" places are left. The "trick" appears to work fine across several...