this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2025
22 points (86.7% liked)

Selfhosted

41554 readers
473 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
22
Reverse proxy without a single point of failure (lemmy.sdf.org)
submitted 1 day ago by victory@lemmy.sdf.org to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I'm thinking of expanding my homelab to support running some paid SaaS projects out of my house, and so I need to start thinking about uptime guarantees.

I want to set up a cluster where every service lives on at least two machines, so that no single machine dying can take a service down. The problem is the reverse proxy: the router still has to point port 443 at a single fixed IP address running Caddy, and that machine will always be a single point of failure. How would I go about running two or more reverse proxy servers with failover?

I'm guessing the answer has something to do with the router, and possibly getting a more advanced router or running an actual OS on the router that can handle failover. But at that point the router is a single point of failure! And yes, that's unavoidable... but I'm reasonably confident that the unmodified commodity router I've used for years is unlikely to spontaneously die, whereas I've had very bad luck with cheap fanless and single-board computers, so anything I buy to use as an advanced router is just a new SPOF and I might as well have used it for the reverse proxy.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Congrats, you're officially at the point where you should probably looking at kubernetes. Highly available, failover, and load balancers. It's a steep learning curve, but if you're looking for this level of availability you're probably ready for it

[–] victory@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Already considering using Kube, though I haven't read much about it yet. Does it support this specific use case (making multiple servers share a single LAN IP with failover), in a way that an ordinary router can use that IP without special configuration?

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 1 points 1 day ago

I use k3s as my base with istio to handle routing, so each node then has the same ports open and istio is the proxy. Internally there's a load balancer to distribute to whatever pod the traffic needs to go to. Outside the cluster DNS is my only single point of failure but it routes to multiple hosts. I doubt you'd have trouble finding a way to have a DNS that can do that. I don't think you can get that much more separated from single points