That’s a good point; My Virtualization server is running on a (fairly beefy) Intel NUC, and it has 2 eth ports on it. One is for management, and the other I plug my VLAN trunk into, which is where all the traffic is going through. I will limit the connection speed of the client that is pulling large video files in hopes the line does not saturate, and long term I’ll try to get a different box where I can separate the VLAN’s onto their own ports instead of gloming them all into one port.
Good point. I just checked and streaming something to my TV causes IO delay to spike to like 70%. I’m also wondering if maybe me routing my Jellyfin (and some other things) through NGINX (also hosted on Proxmox) has something to do with it… Maybe I need to allocate more resources to NGINX(?)
The system running Proxmox has a couple Samsung Evo 980s in it, so I don’t think they would be the issue.
Yeah, I’ve been looking into it for some time. It seems to normally be an issue on the client side (Nvidia shield), the playback will stop randomly and then restart, and this may happen a couple times (no one really knows why, it seems). I recently reinstalled that server on a new VM and a new OS (Debian) with nothing else running on it, and the only client to seem to be able to cause the crash is the TV running the Shield. It’s hard to find a good client for Jellyfin on the TV it seems :(
I have a (beefy specd) Intel NUC that’s running Proxmox. A few of the VMs mount to my RS1221+ for things like media (Jellyfin), etc.
On Proxmox I run
Probably missing a few, but that’s the jist
The safest (but not as convenient) way is to run a VPN, so that the services are only exposed to the VPN interface and not the whole world.
In pfsense I specify which services my OpenVPN connections can access (just an internal facing NGINX for the most part) and then I can just go to jellyfin.homelab, etc when connected.
Not as smooth as just having NGINX outward facing, but gives me piece of mind knowing my network is locked down
Is keeping everything inside of a local “walled garden”, then exposing the minimum amount of services needed to a WireGuard VPN not sufficient?
There would be be no attack surface from WAN other than the port opened to WireGuard