• [6.8rc1][Docker] will not accept --net=container:<name> on 6.8rc1


    Xaero
    • Closed Minor

    So on 6.7 I would configure the "pproxy" docker from dockerhub like so:
    image.png.fd37f46244da0bbb1b9673ac2e7b09ff.png
    And the nordvpn docker would have the port forwards. The pproxy docker would exist within the nordvpn network and therefore already be tunneled into the VPN. By setting up pproxy in this manner I could use socks etc.. to VPN selective traffic to NordVPN at will.

    On Unraid 6.8rc1; this results in an error about the docker not being allowed in two networks simultaneously:
    image.thumb.png.bb94479e3ee1f86f7016730b0751ef60.png

    I'd like to suggest that containers be listed as network options in the dropdown list as a solution, since its the most direct approach.

    Also worth noting that just running the docker directly with:

    docker run -d --name='pproxy' --net=container:nordvpn -e TZ="America/Los_Angeles" -e HOST_OS="Unraid" 'mosajjal/pproxy'
    



    Works fine.



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    18 hours ago, bonienl said:

    Please make this a feature request instead.



    Not my feature request; but this covers the same issue.

    Link to comment

    I had the same issue, was able to get around that by creating a docker network named container:vpn_container_name

    On your terminal run the following command
     

    docker network create container:nordvpn



    Doing the above you don't need --net=container:nordvpn in extra parameters, just select the newly created network from the 'network type' dropdown and it will basically run the same parameter as --net=container:nordvpn

     

    image.png.8c9db7f96da162cb4723bb6cccba0f44.png

    Edited by eafx
    Link to comment
    19 hours ago, Xaero said:

    Excellent workaround!
    Do you happen to know if it persists through updates to the nordvpn container?

    Any containers relying on the VPN container will have to be removed & re-created when the container updates or when it's recreated, it's more of a docker issue than Unraid, as docker expands the value of --net=container:nordvpn to container ID even if you specify the container name, which is really annoying.

     

    So I've written a script that runs every 5mins using the 'user scripts' plugin, which checks if the VPN container ID has changed, if the containers are still using the current VPN container ID, adds containers using the VPN network to it's watch list and removes/recreates when required.

    Link to comment
    3 minutes ago, eafx said:

    Any containers relying on the VPN container will have to be removed & re-created when the container updates or when it's recreated, it's more of a docker issue than Unraid, as docker expands the value of --net=container:nordvpn to container ID even if you specify the container name, which is really annoying.

     

    So I've written a script that runs every 5mins using the 'user scripts' plugin, which checks if the VPN container ID has changed, if the containers are still using the current VPN container ID, adds containers using the VPN network to it's watch list and removes/recreates when required.

    that is super irritating.

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    On 10/20/2019 at 7:08 PM, eafx said:

    So I've written a script that runs every 5mins using the 'user scripts' plugin, which checks if the VPN container ID has changed, if the containers are still using the current VPN container ID, adds containers using the VPN network to it's watch list and removes/recreates when required.

    Any chance you could share this script? Currently I just manually force update all of my containers with the "--net=container:nordvpn" parameter whenever the nordvpn container update.

    Link to comment
    7 hours ago, naughty beatle said:

    Any chance you could share this script? Currently I just manually force update all of my containers with the "--net=container:nordvpn" parameter whenever the nordvpn container update.

    Here ya go mate: https://github.com/elmerfdz/UnRAIDscripts

     

    Let me know if the instructions aren't clear or if you have any issues.

    Link to comment

    I've been meaning to dig a bit deeper as this solution seems "kludgy" overall (no offense - its a great solution)

    I think the intended method would be to use a containerized router solution that doesn't update often, if at all. The client containers would connect using that as their network, and then the endpoint connector ("WAN" in a router sense) would have a static IP. All routing would go through that "WAN" container, and if it rebooted/updated it would be a momentary network interruption, rather than having to rebuild all of the containers. I'll update here if I ever get around to doing such a setup.

    Link to comment


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Status Definitions

     

    Open = Under consideration.

     

    Solved = The issue has been resolved.

     

    Solved version = The issue has been resolved in the indicated release version.

     

    Closed = Feedback or opinion better posted on our forum for discussion. Also for reports we cannot reproduce or need more information. In this case just add a comment and we will review it again.

     

    Retest = Please retest in latest release.


    Priority Definitions

     

    Minor = Something not working correctly.

     

    Urgent = Server crash, data loss, or other showstopper.

     

    Annoyance = Doesn't affect functionality but should be fixed.

     

    Other = Announcement or other non-issue.