Hello and thank you very much for the tutorial with which I managed to connect NordVPN.



then, with the console and "curl ifconfig.io" I get the following output, everything ok, connected!
NordLynx:


For testing purposes, I tried connecting my Radarr container through NORDLYNX.
Test with the Console and Curl results in the following, all also here everything ok!
Radarr:


But, when I try to reach the GUi the following error comes in Chrome:



My settings in NordLynx are as follows:




and still as additional paramenter:



My settings in Radarr are as follows:





The question is, what have I set wrong so that I can reach the GUI of Radarr again?

I am very much looking forward to some constructive help!
Thank you in advance and hereby donate the helper a virtual beer from 🇩🇪

p.s.: If I manage to get it done I will create a simple illustrated step by step tutorial

Edited June 8, 20233 yr by BrutalHarmony

On 6/9/2023 at 4:34 AM, BrutalHarmony said:

Hello and thank you very much for the tutorial with which I managed to connect NordVPN.



then, with the console and "curl ifconfig.io" I get the following output, everything ok, connected!
NordLynx:


For testing purposes, I tried connecting my Radarr container through NORDLYNX.
Test with the Console and Curl results in the following, all also here everything ok!
Radarr:


But, when I try to reach the GUi the following error comes in Chrome:



My settings in NordLynx are as follows:




and still as additional paramenter:



My settings in Radarr are as follows:





The question is, what have I set wrong so that I can reach the GUI of Radarr again?

I am very much looking forward to some constructive help!
Thank you in advance and hereby donate the helper a virtual beer from 🇩🇪

p.s.: If I manage to get it done I will create a simple illustrated step by step tutorial

 

Did you ever get this figured out?

 

In any case I'm so glad for your post because I was struggling to get this working. Every time I would check the IP address when I looked it up it was showing my own country, despite choosing another country. What I had done was I missed the extra part I had to add on the QUERY bit. Once I added that, I finally had success. 

 

Next I'll be working on the same thing you are above. If i can get it working, I'll let you know. I have routed containers before like this and if I remember correctly I had to use a very different IP address to access the container. My local IP addresses start with 192 but I think the addresses to the containers changed to ones that started with 127. Anyways, I'm rambling now..... Just a little excited that after many hours I finally have this working!!

Hello

 

I have a few questions, is it possible to use meshnet with this applikcation?? And if so, do anyone have a guide??

further more if i search nordvpn, in applications. I only get one app called glutenvpn.

So how to get this docker??

 

Thank you

Regards

Hello all. I have just started getting an issue where nordlynx cannot select a server. It was previously working without issue

 

parse error: Invalid numeric literal at line 1, column 7
[migrations] started
[migrations] no migrations found
[2024-03-18T20:35:37+00:00] Firewall is up, everything has to go through the vpn
usermod: no changes
───────────────────────────────────────
  _____ __ __ _____ _____ _____ _____ 
 |     |  |  |   __|_   _|     |     |
 |   --|  |  |__   | | | |  |  | | | |
 |_____|_____|_____| |_| |_____|_|_|_|
       _____ __ __ _ __    ____  
      | __  |  |  | |  |  |    \ 
      | __ -|  |  | |  |__|  |  |
      |_____|_____|_|_____|____/ 

  Based on images from linuxserver.io
───────────────────────────────────────

To support the app dev(s) visit:
Bubuntux: https://github.com/sponsors/bubuntux
WireGuard: https://www.wireguard.com/donations/
To support LSIO projects visit:
https://www.linuxserver.io/donate/

───────────────────────────────────────
GID/UID
───────────────────────────────────────

User UID:    911
User GID:    911
───────────────────────────────────────

[2024-03-19T07:35:37+11:00] Enabling connection to eth0 172.17.0.3/16
[2024-03-19T07:35:37+11:00] Enabling connection to secure interfaces
[2024-03-19T07:35:37+11:00] No interface network6 detected
[2024-03-19T07:35:37+11:00] Enabling connection to network 192.168.0.0/16
[custom-init] No custom files found, skipping...
[ls.io-init] done.
[2024-03-19T07:35:37+11:00] Finding the best server...
[2024-03-19T07:35:49+11:00] Unable to select a server ¯\_(⊙︿⊙)_/¯

 

 

I am unsure what is happening here. Has anyone seen this before?

 

 

EDIT: I did a forced update and it all fired back up

 

DOUBLE EDIT: Its failed again with the same issue. Tried to force the update but it does not resolve the problem

 

Edited March 22, 20242 yr by IamDan

I finally managed to get Nord setup and connected to Australia.  I'm struggling routing Emby through it.  The few attempts I have made crash the docker.  My remote connection to Emby is presently timing out.

 

Which ports do I need to setup in Nord for Emby, the local or the public (or both)?  What settings need to be added in Emby/Swag?

Edited March 23, 20242 yr by medicmandan

Hi there,

 

i got several errors with the nordlynx container cause the logo could not be downloaded:

 

root: nordlynx: Could not download icon https://s1.nordcdn.com/nordvpn/media/1.1527.0/images/global/logos/square/nordvpn-48.svg

 

I've been having a really hard time getting Nordlynx to work with my new networking setup and I'm starting to think it could be a bug or undocumented limitation in the actual container:

Basically, if I set up nordlynx with the default or a custom bridge without any special settings, it works perfectly. Unraid shows ports mapping from the nordlynx container to the bridged ip address. My problem is, I'm trying to route containers on a DMZ vlan through the nordlynx container and nordlynx does not seem to play nicely with any custom network configuration.

My unraid network setup consists of br0 (internal), br0.30 (private), and br0.40 (DMZ). On unraids docker configuration, I have two networks being created for br0.30 and br0.40 with a reserved DHCP pool on the subnet. These are created by unraid as ipvlan type networks. If I set up any of my containers on the br0.40 network, I'm able to communicate with them, they're able to communicate with the internet, and swag can route to them without issue.

However, if I place the nordlynx container on the br0.40 network, it fails to connect to anything outside of the NET_LOCAL parameter. I can connect to DNS if the DNS is inside the net_local range, but I can't actually make the call to the api servers. My guess is that whatever network is bridged is the *external* network and whatever network is specified as NET_LOCAL is the *internal* network. It would seem then that the only solution is to create a bridge, but since my unraid machine is attached to 3 separate vlans, I need to make sure the bridge specifically binds to the 40 vlan address. I set up an address at 192.168.40.123 for unraid on the 40 vlan and used opnsense to block off all access to that ip (since setting up a new ip for unraid creates all the connections for the gui and ssh), then ran the following to bind the bridge to it:
 

root@unraid:~# docker network create test-bridge -o com.docker.network.bridge.host_binding_ipv4=192.168.40.123

However, whenever I do this, the UI shows that I'm bound to the br0 address (192.168.1.123) and not the br0.40 address (192.168.40.123) and from what I can tell in my firewall logs, the docker container will use any and all of the IP addresses attached to the host machine. If I ping 192.168.40.1, the connection usually (but not always) comes from 192.168.40.123. If I ping 192.168.1.1, the connection either gets blocked as it should OR comes from 192.168.1.123. Sometimes I could get a traceroute to the destination, but sometimes it was blocked by interface specific rules on the router, and doing a traceroute to each of the addresses of the host machine was a single operation (no router involved).

Now, at this point, if I limit NET_LOCAL to 192.168.40.0/24 (the 40 vlan), it seems like its fairly reliable that it communicates with the the correct ip since it can't do anything internally outside of that scope I believe, but it looks like I can actually access the unraid gui from here. I'm able to wget on 192.168.40.123 and pull in the gui on that ip address despite having it blocked on my router/firewall. In my opinion, this is a pretty massive security hole if I'm trying to isolate the containers from the host. I would have expected that reaching the other ip addresses on unraid would have to bounce off the router and come back, but that isn't the case here.

Note that when I use the default bridge here (192.168.1.123) and the same NET_LOCAL setting (192.168.40.0/24), I actually can't reach the 192.168.1.123 gui OR the 192.168.40.123 gui. The 192.168.1.123 address is outside of my NET_LOCAL and the 192.168.40.0 address has to cross my router like I would expect in order to communicate, where it gets blocked. This means this security hole only gets opened if you bridge Nordlynx (the only way to get it to work) with the same address that your unraid gui sits on (which is the standard recommended way to do this). Its likely I'm just not understanding how docker containers are supposed to network with each other, but I do know that this is not something I would ever be comfortable leaving as is.

All of that said, I'm really not sure where to go from here. Nordlynx doesn't seem able to run in ipvlan mode, I can't open an IP address in the DMZ for nordlynx to bridge to, and without either of those things, I don't see any possible way to configure nordlynx for a vlan setup. Has anyone had any success doing this without putting nordlynx basically in host mode?
 

Edited October 6, 20241 yr by nuunuu

Hi everyone — up until recently, NordLynx had been working perfectly on my setup. But yesterday, I noticed Radarr searches weren't going through. On closer inspection, it turns out NordLynx wasn’t connecting at all — it couldn’t establish a link to a server and instead threw the error shown in the attached screenshot.

I haven’t changed anything major — just the usual Unraid and container updates — so I’m not sure what's causing the issue. I did manage to get things partially working through a rather convoluted routing tweak, but it's clearly a temporary fix and not ideal long-term.

Is anyone else experiencing this? Or does anyone have suggestions for a more permanent solution?