Frank1940

For a quick AI overview, Google iperf test If you need more help, Google iperf test procedure IF the AI is not enough, look at the links below the AI infor....

The other big thing that I see are the single quote (instead off double quotes) around myunraid.net

Line break are a big problem as the term does not result in the same ASCII character being used for different OS.. Windows = CR LF UNIX = LF MacOS = CR Where CR is Carriage Return Where LF is Line Feed or New Line (All of these are commands originally intended in use by teletype machines. There probably aren't twenty of these still working order left in the world!) This can cause a lot of problems with straight text configuration files written/edited with one OS and subsequently interpreted by a second OS!

@JorgeB, Could you alert the proper person on the Unraid design team to fix this? Thanks!

I feel like there should be some way to m I don't use pfsense so I don't know what is the impact of disabling the check. Is it simply a warning? Firefox (and I assume most other browse do to) issues a warning if you try asking a site using http:// protocol and make you jump through a few hoops to do so. If I recall correctly, it generally 'remembers' that site and does mot require that you do it again.

Try googling this: pfsense local dns resolver for unraid.net This was one of the results: https://forums.unraid.net/topic/74143-ssl-certificate-provisioning-w-pfsense-aka-logging-in-to-local-unraid-server-via-ssl/ The AI result ( assuming you are getting Google's AI results as well as those from the 'normal' search) might be all you need...

I have found my problem. On the clients where I could not connect, I was using the DNS service from my IPS provider. On the machines where I could connect, I was using Cloudflare as the primary provider. Quick explanation, My IPS CNS server is preventing redircts! How to do this shown below: 1.1.1.1 is Cloudflare's DNS server and 8.8.8.8 Is Google's DNS as an alternate.

Have a look at this 'Help' screen: In my setup, If Unraid.net address works, I have to be logged via the local address. If it does not work for a computer, it does not matter if I login via the local address, unraid.net address is never found. While it is a security issue, all my client computers access the LAN via Cat5 connections and not wireless so the loss of encryption for the password exchange is less of a problem. I have decided to accept the risk for now. But I will be following your thread to see if there is something I have missed.

I have had a simpler problem EXCEPT that only a couple of my computers would allow my to use the unraid.net address. The others throw this error: I could never figure way it was behaving this way. I finally said 'Forget it" and just set Use SSL/TLS: to "No". (And I think the "Forget it" was said a bit more colorful language. 🙊) Because different computers( all running wiht the same WINDOWS 11 PRO configuration) that worked and didn't work were on the same LAN, modem, router and DNS, these were ruled out as possible causes of the problem. I seem to recall that Chrome had the same issue as Firefox. Good luck....

This is another option that can be employed BUT you should do an analysis of how many free space you lose and with decent estimate of how much storage space you will be in the future. A time window of five years is probably enough. Another option to be explored is removing some smaller drives by transferring their contents to some of older larger drives to fill them up closer to their capacity. That way if you do need to swap a new capacity drive for more storage room, you lose less space by replacing drive. (If you replace an almost full 8TB drive with a 24TB drive, you only gain 16TB in the process. If that drive was a 4TB drive, you would gain 20TB on the swap. Remember that the cost of the 24TB drive is a constant in analysis.)

In a former life, I was an Senior Electrical Engineer and I was involved in the design of 'systems'. Much of that task involved making decisions about size, capability, reliability, and cost as well as usability. Believe me when I say that not one design solution ever meets all of the requirements that were originally set. The end result usually involves some compromises on the part of everyone. (I remember that in my class in ROTC, an Army reserve major, who had gone ashore at Normandy, said, "You will never have enough men, equipment, time or money to do the job. But you will still have to do it somehow!") You now have a running system that now has some fixed design constraints. You will now need a plan to manage that system. So be working on that plan and get one that will work for you. The AI build-out has made a total mess of the Electronic component supply system. I don't know how long the current situation can exist. I suspect that it might well be a bubble with people, who have not really looked at the operating cost plus sunk cost for those data centers, throwing money at the concept to be the first one to have one running. (Unless, they are going to provide the AI services at a loss, those costs have to priced into every query made...)

One more important point about arrays with very large size parity drive(s). If you have many different size data drives in the array, the speed of the parity check is control by the read speed of the slowest drive in the array. As an example, in my Backup Server, I have a 3TB drive and its read speed is about 90MB/s on the very inner tracks of the drive. (Everyone should realize that all HD's have their slowest read speeds on those inner tracks.) At that point, the potential read speeds of the 12TB parity drive and the other 12TB data drives is about 180MB/s! As a point of reference, the parity check times for my two servers (See specs in signature below) are: Media Server 22 hours, 29 minutes, 24 seconds. Average speed: 148.2 MB/s Backup Server for Data and Media 21 hours, 32 minutes, 42 seconds. Average speed: 154.7 MB/s I have now fixed on only using 12TB drives in my servers. This allows me to have only one size of 'spare drive' to have on hand for expansion and/or replacement @Ouze , your average data drive size is approximately 12TB (192TB/15drives) . Your potential data storage with this array as presently designed and configured is 360TB. You should have asked yourself if you really can see the need for that much storage in the next five years before deciding on the first 24TB drive purchase. I know that there is a tendency to want the latest and biggest in all of us. But there are also disadvantages to doing so without looking at the much larger picture. I can also understand that designing and configuring a brand new server can result a completely different configuration that one would choose when re-configuring an old server. (In the past, When I was re-configuring my servers, I was was doubling the size of the parity drive. That simplistic approach no longer makes sense as it results in potential array sizes that I can never fill and parity check times that I find simply unacceptable.

Don't do this. I wanted to make sure that the file was not corrupted in some way. From what I can see, it is not.

Have a good look at this file (Used two places and see what is doing) I have only a single Custom SMB Share and this is what my file looks like:

One piece of advice. Always have a backup of your flash device that is current. You can easily do this by open the MAIN tab of the GUI, click on the 'Boot' device under the Boot Device section, then click on the BOOT DEVICE BACKUP button. It seems that the quality of USB flash drives has dropped dramatically in the past few years. This has resulted in failures during the upgrade process because of write failures to those drives. Many folks are shifting to using one of the other boot options but understand that they also can have have their own issues. So do your own investigation before making a change and chose the best option for you.

You are saying that no shares (disk# or Samba-extra defined shares) are showing up under Tailscale? (I am no Tailscale expert but rather I set it up using the cookbook method. I didn't have any problems. I thought it might be because you were using disk shares but I have two disk sahres showing on the tailscale client... I will point out one more thing, With a User Share, you can restrict the share to only one disk. See here for how to do that: If you specify that the User Share is restricted to a single disk, you will have a essentially a Disk Share. It also allows you to add a second disk if the original disk becomes full. (PS--- This was a share that I setup to test something or other out on– don't remember what it was!) At this point, I am going to bail out as I have nothing more to contribute.

I just tried accessing my server via Tailscale on a computer that has Tailscale access setup on it and this is what I got: And, while I could see all the shares, I could only access those shares that that computer user had permissions to access, Everything is working exactly as expected...

You are the first person that I have run to who is simply using Disk shares only. And you (apparently) are permitting access to everything on your server from any 'guest' account. (Which means anyone who has access to your server.) I have shared a disk via 'Disk Shares' (SHARES >>>>> Disk Shares and chose a disk# to share and set up the security settings from there to share that entire disk ) but I have never tried to setup sharing a directory entry point from a disk as a Share. I looked at your Diagnostics and did not find an entry for a SMB share named Docs and that confuses me. Did you generate a dummy entry or what? I am also assuming that when you make this statement: you are talking about accessing via SMB on your local LAN. A screenshot like this (from Windows File Explorer) could be useful: Note that the 'cache' share in this shot is a Disk Shares as is 'flash'. All of my shares are 'Private' and access type is on a need-to-know basis.

Please post your Diagnostics file in a new post in this Thread.

Before you do anything, try to copy the entire contents of the boot drive. If that fails copy the .key file. If that works try to copy that /config folder as it contains the setup information.

Look in the root of the Unraid Boot Drive and the /config folder. The License file has an extension of .key. You can also contact support via this link: https://unraid.net/contact Provide as much info as possible when doing so.

This EDIT: So your controller has to pass the serial number through. Most of the strictly HBA ones do but be careful as RAID controllers often do not.

The GURUs are going to need to see your diagnostics file. Post it up in a new post in this thread. (Do NOT edit your original post to add it!!!!)

What are these two passwords for? You should only use one password for your apple client computer to log into your Unraid server for file access (SMB). (I probably should avoid answering your query as I have zero experience with the Apple environment...)

You shouljd be able to do that using the 'Edit' from the dropdown menu. IF you require greater access to the files of the container, you should use the 'console' choice from the dropdown mennu. (See the screenshot above in this thread.) You have to realize that any Docker container is an totally independent OS from Unraid. Some Containers use the storage space on the Unraid server just as you do when you save a file via a user share. You do expect that you will have unrestricted access to the files of all the user share users on your server, do you? You are not intended to access any files in the appdata share via Unraid!!! If/when you do you are hacking the container!