PeteAsking

Unclear what all the complaints are about this docker. Installed it yesterday no issues. Integrated it with jellyfin - no problems at all. Manually downloaded 3 audiobooks from audiobookbay and imported the 3 into a media library in jelly fin via readarr - worked perfectly. I think the UI of readarr is not very user friendly but once you figure it out its ok. Downloaded plappa for ios and syced the books offline and connected this to carplay. Every step was simple and had zero issues. Literally amazed anyone else had a problem.

As other people had no issues with 9.1.120-unraid, it is promoted to home stable.

It cant resolve your firefox bug because the website is hosted externally by unifi and has nothing to do with this image.

Someone was asking about firmware updates a few posts ago, I see one of my devices has one so its clearly working, although unsure when I will apply the firmware as it is for a switch and I dont want to reboot it.

Call for testing: 9.1.120-unraid is available. I had some failed adoptions during this upgrade. Asking for others to test this tag with backups before committing to release. Rebooting the AP's (click restart on switch POE port) resolved the issue. Upgrade path is 9.0.114-unraid -----> 9.1.120-unraid Kind regards P

@jimeez it says Current recommended Home User tag: 11notes/unifi:9.0.114-unraid so the fact you are using 9.0.114 is totally normal. edit: I see what happened. I forgot to update the second time it was mentioned that was all. I will fix now.

As @bmartino1 says, there are versions unsupported that you can use, or versions that are supported. We recommend you use a supported version unless you understand the risks and are haply to fiddle around fixing your unraid and unifi setup. However what you cannot do is come here complaining things are broken when you deviate from an official path. We support specific versions and limited versions, all of which are posted on post 1. There is also a delay between unifi releasing a new version and building, testing which is all a manual process for us. As mentioned the LXC version is automatic and you may use an automated release schedule if you prefer this option. It is totally up to you, but both have differences in their goals and implementation. It is up to you to decide what your needs are.

Be patient

Although upgrading is generally safe you should assume any time you upgrade you will lose everything and be required to restore from backup. If you are not in a position to be able to restore from backup then the official line from me as the maintainer is do not update. Simple as that.

I think the main issue is nobody turns on remote management as it defeats the entire point of self hosting (you control everything) and there is zero reason to use it once you have wireguard in place. Its just easier to have wireguard and use the unifi app on my phone and nothing ever touches unifis servers. Remote management is your network is one breach away from being controlled and the security is all based on how much effort unifi put in. This is most likely why you dont find a lot of people in this situation - Its not because they dont use firefox. Its because you are like the 0.0001% of people using remote management. We are putting value on privacy and security over this unifi feature that isnt really necessary.

@MrTroll we are not a team. I made this docker for myself and to share with other people that have a similar need to me. I have no control over what other people post. They have a right to post whatever they want. I dont interfere with that. I only speak for myself. He is promoting you use his maintained lxc container instead of this docker container. Again, nothing to do with me and I cant comment. If it is a solution and it works better feel free to use it. I have never used it personally and wouldnt know. I do concede that multiple solutions can meet different needs of users so it is possible an alternative would work better for you. But I again stress this is nothing to do with me. I always answer your questions and anyone else's independently on my own. Regards when the issue started - this website is maintained by unifi. They could have changed something anytime and we would not know. I also cant control anything on unifis website or explain why they have issues with firefox. It seems to work fine with edge and chrome. Probably that accounts for 99% of their users and they only test with that. I suggest you just use chrome or edge if it works for you and not worry about it. Nobody except unifi can fix this. I cant change how unraids docker networking functions and I cant change how the software provided by unifi works. I can provide only the setup and install support of their image into an unraid format works. So I am quite limited in what I can do. Ultimately this problem does not seem to be one that I have control over as components being discussed I cant change.

@MrTroll Ok so no video needed. I tested on a remote pc with firefox and it also had edge. on firefox it does not load. I get that same error in the logs from IP 104.30.148.xxx range. tried in edge on the same pc directly after and it worked and opened no issue. So what must I do about that? Unifi I guess dont make their site work with firefox.

@MrTroll what is ‘the globe icon’ ? Unclear what you refer to here.

I will install firefox somewhere and post a video of what happens for me from an external location later today so you can compare. can you not also check this from your phone on mobile data using safari and rule out this being your local pc or something

I dont have firefox easily to test, but regardless lets stick with what is confirmed working 100% with no delays for me right now. Can you confirm that you are only using this method externally to the site - eg: you understand you cant use unifi.ui.com while at home at the same site as the controller? This method is for remote access while not at home or on the business site. If you are using this while at home, nat reflection will prevent this from working on your firewall. Please check you are on an different internet connection with no vpn while using the remote access method. This is working for me in chrome with no issues. I can show a video if you need confirmation of this. - Pete @MrTroll

In firefox isnt there a little shield icon on the left of the address bar where you can disable advanced protection or something? Have you tried turning that off? @MrTroll

Do you use static ip addressing on any of the ap’s or switches? Please check you have dns assigned to the devices and or normal dhcp. If you use dns filter eg pihole please disable for an hour while you test.

Only ap and switches

Also check you have this set like in this format:

@MrTroll I agree I am running out of ideas here. Is the date correct (type date in the console and check not out more than 5 minutes).

Can you check your docker has internet? Open the console of the reborn docker and do this:

I think something in your firewall is interfering. What is your firewall setup and is it complex? @MrTroll

Also check you dont have any super complex firewall setup interfering in addition.

@MrTroll to test this without making too many changes you could stop the container running on 8443 and then let the unifi controller use that port again, make sure you didnt have any firewall rules on that port etc. then check if its working. If this test solves it you can decide how best to change things internally to accommodate.

This is why it does not work. You cannot change the port because the stun is hardwired to connect back to that port. for this setup you must change from bridge to macvlan and assign the container its own ip on the lan and allow it to use the native ports. This should resolve your issues. remember as far as the container knows it is using 8443 so if it informs the external website via stun it will inform it to connect back on 8443. This cant be solved without you making sure that this is reachable somehow. another option is to use nat rewrite rules on your firewall. I do not recommend exposing the container to the internet however.