Multiple Syncthing Docker Container Question

[House Of Cards]

Good evening,

 

Since Syncthing isn't multi-user, I'm thinking I need to create two Syncthing Docker containers (one for each user), and give each a different port number.  Correct?

 

For port numbers, I could use the Linux User ID.  Ideally, I'd like Syncthing to run and be accessed using that ID as the port, but I'm unsure what I'm doing wrong.  When I change the port to something other than 8384, Syncthing can't be reached.  So, for example, if Joe was user 1234, I'd like the docker instance to run on port 1234, and Joe to access the Server_IP:1234 to see his files, and set up sync for his stuff.  User Stacy's Docker could be running on port 4321, and access her files from Server_IP:4321.

 

Questions....

 

1.  Does that sound reasonable, and which do I change to the variable port I want?

 

 

Should I use the default "Bridge" network, or my custom network where other dockers reside?  Best practice-wise?

 

I appreciate the advice on getting more than one instance of this running....

 

Thanks!

[primeval_god]

On 11/20/2023 at 9:34 PM, House Of Cards said:

which do I change to the variable port I want?

You would change the host port.

 

On 11/20/2023 at 9:34 PM, House Of Cards said:

1.  Does that sound reasonable

Using the linux user id sounds kind of complicated to me. Would that be the user id from unRAID or from another machine? How will the users know their id? 

Personally i prefer using a reverse proxy like traefik for something like this. Then each user can have a nice address to use http://Server_IP:Traefik_Port/username/

[House Of Cards]

1e9cf4b97e32

7 hours ago, primeval_god said:

You would change the host port.

 

Using the linux user id sounds kind of complicated to me. Would that be the user id from unRAID or from another machine? How will the users know their id? 

Personally i prefer using a reverse proxy like traefik for something like this. Then each user can have a nice address to use http://Server_IP:Traefik_Port/username/

 

My remote access has grief; I'm using CG-NAT so the IP is shared with other cellular users.  I have yet to figure out that aspect, as I don't have a real need for remote access anyhow.  It's on the back burner though on my to-do list.

 

I've always been mystified that Syncthing sticks to this single-user design.  It really cripples the software.

 

So I'm only needing this for three people.  They are the only accounts with storage on my network anyway.  They don't "need" to know their User ID.  I can just create bookmarks with their ID's in the port, and password-protect the Syncthing GUI.  That's the server-side thinking.  After that I'd need to multi-user the individual machines instance also.  The single-user model is really over-complicating this as usual though.  Unfortunately, everything else I've tried has its own problems.  I'd like to get this up and running.

 

In essence, I'm just trying to sync one share per user on UnRAID with multiple laptops/desktops for each user.  So their folder stays up-to-date with what's on the server share.

[primeval_god]

15 hours ago, House Of Cards said:

My remote access has grief; I'm using CG-NAT so the IP is shared with other cellular users.  I have yet to figure out that aspect, as I don't have a real need for remote access anyhow.  It's on the back burner though on my to-do list.

I wasnt suggesting a reverse proxy to the internet. I use one (traefik) purely locally so that all my services are on different named paths vs different ports. You can go a step further and put the reverse proxy container on an ipvlan type network so it has its own ip address and serves on the common ports 80 and 443.

[House Of Cards]

On 11/23/2023 at 9:42 AM, primeval_god said:

I wasnt suggesting a reverse proxy to the internet. I use one (traefik) purely locally so that all my services are on different named paths vs different ports. You can go a step further and put the reverse proxy container on an ipvlan type network so it has its own ip address and serves on the common ports 80 and 443.

I might look into something like Traefik down the road, but I can't even see the pricing on their site without signing up.  I do see a need for remote access for media, etc... Maybe this could make that simple in my CG-NAT world?

 

Right now though, I'm running into the same issues I remember from previous syncthing attempts.  I need to make syncthing start on a shared machine using the port for that user...  The fact that syncthing is setup like this is frustrating as hell.  It reminds me of the Windows 95 networking password.  Where you just clicked "cancel" and accessed the stuff anyway.  LOL

[Kilrah]

Syncthing just isn't meant for that, the whole point is being a "serverless", p2p way to sync between your multiple devices, not for sharing something on a server to multiple people.

You can change the webui port but you'll still run into issues with the transfer ports conflicting.

This is a case where you should probably use br0 and give each instance its own IP, so they can all use the standard ports if you really want to use this.

Edited November 26, 2023 by Kilrah

[primeval_god]

8 hours ago, House Of Cards said:

I might look into something like Traefik down the road, but I can't even see the pricing on their site without signing up.

Traefik can be used for free without signing up for anything. I am sure they sell some sort of service but I wouldnt even know what it was.

[House Of Cards]

On 11/25/2023 at 2:21 PM, Kilrah said:

Syncthing just isn't meant for that, the whole point is being a "serverless", p2p way to sync between your multiple devices, not for sharing something on a server to multiple people.

You can change the webui port but you'll still run into issues with the transfer ports conflicting.

This is a case where you should probably use br0 and give each instance its own IP, so they can all use the standard ports if you really want to use this.

 

The issue with syncthing is that it isn't even meant for what you describe.  If you have two laptops that you and the wife share, you can't even run syncthing for both users on the same machine to sync directly between the two laptops.  Syncthing is a great tool as long as only one person uses each device.  The fact that it isn't multi-user is a failure at this point.  It's NOT a new project, and they haven't done anything to address multi-user environments...  It seems like it's not even on their radar...

 

Maybe you all have a better suggestion?  I just want each user to have a folder on their machine which syncs with a folder on UnRaid.  Why this seems to be something which requires a networking degree is amazingly hard to believe.  LOL

 

I tried Seafile, but it needs an external SQL database, and when I set it up, it seemed unreliable.  Occasionally I'd find that the sync stopped happening for no reason (docker update, maybe?), and you'd have no idea.  Rsync, scripting, remote access, all these "workarounds"...  It seems like this is a common need with no simple soltion for those who want plug-and-play.  So your options are a service like dropbox or mega.nz...  None which are open source or local control.

 

I'm open to ideas....  I'll look into traefek more also...

 

Thanks!

[Kilrah]

10 hours ago, House Of Cards said:

If you have two laptops that you and the wife share, you can't even run syncthing for both users on the same machine to sync directly between the two laptops. 

Well you can, but each user needs his own copy of the folder.

 

10 hours ago, House Of Cards said:

Maybe you all have a better suggestion?  I just want each user to have a folder on their machine which syncs with a folder on UnRaid.

I'm using nextcloud. Will still need each account to have their copy of the shared folder, in fact it's even more necessary on things that have multi-user support. No different with dropbox.

 

  

10 hours ago, House Of Cards said:

I'll look into traefek more also...

Traefik is just acting as reverse proxy, it doesn't provide a service on its own.

Edited November 27, 2023 by Kilrah