Live data from Hacker News

Ubiquiti launches UniFi OS Server for self-hosting

lazyadmin.nl

291–300 of 341 posts

Re: Ubiquiti launches UniFi OS Server for self-hosting

#291
post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thread you reference ends with the post saying " it is fixed in the 7.4.140 controller release ", so im not sure how you can say it wasnt acknowledged or fixed.

Are you a ubiquiti employee who can see internal posts perhaps? There’s no such post on the public discussion. The only two instances of “fixed” on the page are people expressing hope it will someday be fixed.

If you follow the thread, there is a "continue here" link which jumps to another thread about the same problem, and the first post notes the fix:

https://community.ui.com/questions/U6-IW-how-to-trunk-all-5-...

Re: Ubiquiti launches UniFi OS Server for self-hosting

#292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still use their access points because it's hard to get anything else as good for the same kind of price, but they burned me killing the development on EdgeRouter. So I've gone elsewhere for cameras, switching and routing. This release is a nice point in their favour though but I can't see myself going back all in on Ubiquiti.

This. We used to do a lot of Ubiquiti, then the software quality went way down, their own security officer 'hacked' them and lots of other weird stuff. We were already using debian vm's instead of their horrible cloudkey devices (so slow..). We switched to Aruba Instant-On. We still use some Ubiquiti. Sometimes i use this script on a Debian VM: https://community.ui.com/questions/UniFi-Installation-Script...

The new generation Ubiquiti hardware with built-in management is really good, inexpensive, and interface is responsive. It's also just good looking. They've really gotten better across the board. I'm using the Cloud Gateway Max.

https://ui.com/us/en/cloud-gateways/compact

Re: Ubiquiti launches UniFi OS Server for self-hosting

#293
post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can setup and initialize an AP with a controller, and that controller doesn't require a cloud account or internet access.

Sorry to be paranoid, but is this current info from your personal experience? Because that's how it was years ago, and then they tried to make the cloud account compulsory, and the last time I asked around it was sort of not compulsory but you still needed to create one for the initial setup and only then put your AP somehow in standalone mode.

I self host the controller/network (slightly outdated, 9.1 vs 9.3) with no cloud. Adopted a new U7 pro a few weeks ago, still no cloud.

So everything still works as it used to.

Re: Ubiquiti launches UniFi OS Server for self-hosting

#294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've moved on from Ubiquiti access points as well. Their U6 simply does not handle VLANs properly, they never acknowledged the issue let alone fixed it. See https://community.ui.com/questions/U6-IW-how-to-trunk-all-5-... Their security issues in the past. Their failure to make the EdgeRouter handle DHCP and DNS properly. Etc... I've since moved to cheap switches that support all port vlan trunks and LACP bonding, the…

I’m curious to know more about your setup! Which switches do you prefer? What hardware are you using for proxmox? And what does your network look like? Cheers!

For the switches I'm considering replacing them all with 2.5gbit but don't see the need to yet. Currently I have a TL-SG1016DE as the core switch. The main proxmox servers are 3 used Dell 1U servers I bought from Ebay. Each has 256GB ECC ram, 2x 8 core CPUs, 4x Gbit intel nics. I flashed the PERC card to be a plain SCSI controller so ZFS in Proxmox has direct access to the disks. If I were to buy them today I'd look for R720's or newer. I got mine for about $800 USD each. They're overkill, but provide a lot of capacity. They're also unnecessary, you can ignore them and only consider the rest of this comment. They're the most expensive, hottest, and loudest devices on the network.

I have a separate tower that's a old 9th gen intel that provides the large ~50TB ZFS NFS server. It used to be an intel Atom, but that finally died after 10 years so I moved the drives to a gaming PC I had lying around. Over the years, nicest thing about ZFS and Proxmox is the drives are fully independent of the hardware and the software OS they're attached to. Now, I just pass the devices through Proxmox to a Debian VM and they come up just like they did before.

Regarding the rest of the network, let's move from the edge in toward the 3x 1U servers and NFS storage box. I have 1gig symmetric fiber from Ziply. The ONT has cat5 running to 1 of the 4 gig ports in an Intel Atom C2758. The other 3 ports are bridged together in Proxmox to act as a switch. It kind of looks like an EdgeRouter-4 if you squint at the ports. This C2758 only runs a single VM, OpenWRT. The nice thing is I can take snapshots before upgrades, and upgrade or replace the hardware easily.

The OpenWRT VM is the most critical thing in the whole network. I try to manage it simply, I have some shell scripts that copy the /etc/config files into place and restart services for a simple IaC setup.

The main services OpenWRT provides are:

1. WAN DHCP client, my ISP doesn't offer static IPs. 2. One minute cron job that makes sure the A record for home.example.com is correct. *.home.example.com is a CNAME to home.example.com, this simplifies configuration and TLS cert management. 3. HAProxy runs on OpenWRT listening on 0.0.0.0:80 and 0.0.0.0:443 Extremely valuable for SNI routing of TLS connections. I moved the LuCI web UI to alternate ports, which is simple to do via config. 4. dnsmasq provides dhcp and dns for the main and guest VLANs. 5. OpenWRT is configured as a WireGuard server. Each wireguard client device is allocated an dedicated IP in a separate 192.168.x/24 subnet. This has been great for source based IP access control which I'll cover below. Wireguard clients connect to home.example.com.

That's it for OpenWRT. The key lesson I learned is it's been incredibly valuable to run haproxy on OpenWRT. All L4 connections terminate to it, but crucially it does not handle TLS certificates. It only forwards TCP connections based on the SNI in the client hello. HAProxy is also configured to use the PROXY protocol to preserve source IP addresses, which has been great for access control.

Most TLS connections are forwarded to a single node Talos VM running on another Proxmox host. This VM runs Cilium, Istio, and the Gateway API. The istio envoy gateway is configured to accepts PROXY protocol connections, which means AuthorizationPolicy resources work as expected. By default, only connections coming from the local subnets, or the wireguard subnet are allowed. OpenWRT does hairpin NAT, so this works just fine, all sources connect to the WAN IP regardless if they're internal or external.

I don't do much with Kube yet, most of the traffic is forwarded on to another VM running Portainer. Most of my backend services are in Portainer. The Kube VM does handle Certificate and AuthorizationPolicy resources though, using cert-manager and Istio. This has been nice, I don't need to configure each service for TLS or access control in bespoke way, it's all in one place.

The only other thing to note is the Dell 1U servers have 3 of their 4 gig nics aggregated into LACP bonds. Similar to the Atom router, they're configured as a bridge in Proxmox and I use them for the Ceph data plane. 9 of the 16 ports in that TL-SG1016DE are just for Ceph and I'm able to get close to 600 MiB/sec reads (yes megabytes) which is pretty neat given 1gbit interfaces.

That's about it. Overall I'm trying to eliminate VLAN's, but it still makes sense to have them for Ceph and for a Guest wifi network.

Edit: Lastly I've maintained a home lab for 25 years and this is the best iteration yet. All of the trade-offs feel "right" to me.

Re: Ubiquiti launches UniFi OS Server for self-hosting

#295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My issue with this comment is my issue with the original article -- what's the actual source for this information? As far as I can tell, this article has no actual link back to any Unifi press release, git repo, or other project page about this, the closest the author does is link the downloads from Ubiquiti's site (as in, literally, links to the files, and nothing else). This is janky, yes, and I'm not gonna shill f…

The actual source is this: https://community.ui.com/releases/UniFi-OS-Server-4-2-23/21d... but only accessible if you opt-in to the Unifi Early Access program. We are talking beta software / first release here, so any criticism needs to be looked at through that lens. Also there is the official announcement now: https://blog.ui.com/article/introducing-unifi-os-server

My criticism was mainly of the original article for failing to link to a primary source beyond hotlinking some dmgs.

I appreciate you linking these, though, as well as the extra context.

Re: Ubiquiti launches UniFi OS Server for self-hosting

#296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still use their access points because it's hard to get anything else as good for the same kind of price, but they burned me killing the development on EdgeRouter. So I've gone elsewhere for cameras, switching and routing. This release is a nice point in their favour though but I can't see myself going back all in on Ubiquiti.

I've moved on from Ubiquiti access points as well. Their U6 simply does not handle VLANs properly, they never acknowledged the issue let alone fixed it. See https://community.ui.com/questions/U6-IW-how-to-trunk-all-5-... Their security issues in the past. Their failure to make the EdgeRouter handle DHCP and DNS properly. Etc... I've since moved to cheap switches that support all port vlan trunks and LACP bonding, the…

is there a writeup on the openwrt/proxmox vm for routing you talk about? Examples of the cheap switches?

Re: Ubiquiti launches UniFi OS Server for self-hosting

#297
post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lotta haters out there but this is just advanced as I want to get in my home lab IN all fairness, that hate is reasonable. Ubiquity has _some_ things done super well. As long as your needs are addressed by the config/options/UX/API that they expose, you'll have a pretty good experience. As soon as you need to do something that isn't easy, you're going to be fighting your core network infra the entire time and that'…

The thing about the UniFi platform is it iteratively improves. Years ago you couldn’t manage NAT rules or DNS from the GUI, though there were workarounds to modify iptables at the command line and preserve customization across upgrades. Now days, static routes, SNAT/DNAT, and DNS are all in the management interface. So.. things improve, and every time I’m back using EdgeRouters, Extreme, or Juniper elements I miss th…

I've always said that Unifi handles well enough the 10% of networking configuration that 90% of users need. If you're in that other 10% of admins who need something more complex then it's not the right pick, but in a great many cases it's strongly planted in "good enough" territory.

Re: Ubiquiti launches UniFi OS Server for self-hosting

#298
post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still use their access points because it's hard to get anything else as good for the same kind of price, but they burned me killing the development on EdgeRouter. So I've gone elsewhere for cameras, switching and routing. This release is a nice point in their favour though but I can't see myself going back all in on Ubiquiti.

For cameras, everyone should be looking into https://openipc.org/

This looks cool but it's not on any camera brand I have ever heard of before. I have a bunch of hikvision stuff that is on its own vlan with no internet access because it's concerningly chatty with Chinese IPs. I would love to put openipc on them.

Re: Ubiquiti launches UniFi OS Server for self-hosting

#299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've moved on from Ubiquiti access points as well. Their U6 simply does not handle VLANs properly, they never acknowledged the issue let alone fixed it. See https://community.ui.com/questions/U6-IW-how-to-trunk-all-5-... Their security issues in the past. Their failure to make the EdgeRouter handle DHCP and DNS properly. Etc... I've since moved to cheap switches that support all port vlan trunks and LACP bonding, the…

Their software updates are also very flakey. The past few releases for the Console and occasionally the Network were pulled right after being published for having blocking bugs. Again and again they publish the update and then do QA on their users. If you have an IT department you probably have some sort of process in place to deal with this and deploy when you're satisfied. A home user will probably have auto-update…

Talking about flaky updates, Network update just published, already a flood of complaints [0]. And the constant changes in the GUI, with buttons and features constantly shuffled around and moved from one place to another for no apparent reason, are tiring.

[0] https://community.ui.com/releases/UniFi-Network-Application-...

Re: Ubiquiti launches UniFi OS Server for self-hosting

#300

I love the idea of centrally managing network infrastructure that can be ‘self-contained’ in a local service (whether a device, VM, or container). TP-Link offers a similar solution via their ‘Omada’-enabled devices. Unfortunately, mixing different brands can feel counterproductive, so there’s significant vendor lock-in. Does anyone know of a similar solution for OpenWrt devices?

Self answering here: Seems like OpenWisp[1] is what I was looking for. I haven't used it yet, but I'm adding it to my bucketlist (currently using Omada, but a bit dissapointed with the sluginess)

[1] https://openwisp.org/

Post reply on HN