[Support] Linuxserver.io - Unifi

[CHBMB]

Yeah, I have tried cache/cookies clearing.  I think I will wait a couple more days for feedback prior to laying down a new unifi. 

Well you don't need to trash your current one, just use a different appdata folder. That's the whole point of docker containers.

[ugp]

I am having an issue with Adopting using this Docker. I fired up a Ubuntu VM and installed the controller there and it Adopted right away no problems.

 

The device just stays on Adopting and then eventually shows Disconnected and then back to Adopting.

I have tried to SSH into the Device and do the set-inform command with no luck. It seems to be something around the docker on my end. I guess I don't see any reason not to do a Linux VM as I can use it for other things as well. But would like to know what would be causing this.

[CorneliousJD]

5 minutes ago, ugp said:

I am having an issue with Adopting using this Docker. I fired up a Ubuntu VM and installed the controller there and it Adopted right away no problems.

 

The device just stays on Adopting and then eventually shows Disconnected and then back to Adopting.

I have tried to SSH into the Device and do the set-inform command with no luck. It seems to be something around the docker on my end. I guess I don't see any reason not to do a Linux VM as I can use it for other things as well. But would like to know what would be causing this.

 

I had this issue too, I eventually just set it up on its own IP with the newer version of unRAID, all problems solved after that though. Not a single issue since then.

[Aurao]

12 hours ago, CorneliousJD said:

 

I had this issue too, I eventually just set it up on its own IP with the newer version of unRAID, all problems solved after that though. Not a single issue since then.

as a note: this solved my issues as well

[Ockingshay]

I have been running the controller on my iMac, but wanted to have it permanently running, so i installed this docker with default settings. I took a backup of my iMac controller and then carried out a restore on my unRAID controller.

 

it picked up all my APs but i too was stuck on the adopting => disconnected loop. I changed the network type to "host" from "bridged" and it has all started working again.

 

Is there a concern with using "host" ? What does that do to my server? am i going to have issues somewhere else now? i don't understand the semantics.

[nas_nerd]

On 5/26/2018 at 9:51 AM, Aurao said:

as a note: this solved my issues as well

Not that I am having issues now, but I recall I had lots of trouble with my initial adoption last year...

 

Can I simply change from bridge to br0 in my docker settings? Anything I should change in the UniFi controller settings first?

 

I just don't want to somehow bring my whole network down...

[dalben]

Reporting this from the ngix thread where it didn't get any answers.  I'm not sure where the problem is:

 

I have an issue where when the ngix docker stops and restarts (nightly backup, etc) the port forwarding from my router (USG using the LSIO Unifi Docker) no longer works.  I have to restart the Unifi container/controller for the port forwarding to work.

 

Does anyone else have this combo of containers and experiencing the same problem ?

[Traverser]

On 5/28/2018 at 8:56 PM, dalben said:

Reporting this from the ngix thread where it didn't get any answers.  I'm not sure where the problem is:

 

I have an issue where when the ngix docker stops and restarts (nightly backup, etc) the port forwarding from my router (USG using the LSIO Unifi Docker) no longer works.  I have to restart the Unifi container/controller for the port forwarding to work.

 

Does anyone else have this combo of containers and experiencing the same problem ?

 

 

Same issue.

[lishpy]

Is there a way to update this container without having to wait for the maintainer to do so? Can I just update the controller via the webUI with the Unifi firmware?

 

This is still sitting on the 5.6 branch which is the older stable version. The stable 5.7.X has been out for months (which you are having us mark as "unstable" if we want to run it), and release candidates of 5.8 have been out for months as well, which means this is going to be two .X releases behind once 5.8 drops here. They've even had 5.9.X betas out for a while as well. I do appreciate a way to run Unifi on my unRAID server but I wish there were more options for those who don't want to run old stable versions. Options to run the 5.7 track while not as "unstable" would be great, along with ways to run the betas.

 

 

[CHBMB]

2 hours ago, lishpy said:

Is there a way to update this container without having to wait for the maintainer to do so? Can I just update the controller via the webUI with the Unifi firmware?

 

No, unless you want to fork it and build it yourself.

 

This seems to generate a lot of angst amongst people but from our perspective we have to be careful, to put it bluntly, Unifi make great hardware and decidedly iffy software with any upgrade a bit like playing russian roulette with your wifi.

 

Our priority has to be not breaking someones install first and foremost if they're running latest.  Add into that the support headache I certainly don't foresee us running release candidates or beta releases.

 

Not quite sure what the long term plan is regarding naming conventions at the moment, but can be pretty sure we'll continue to support the LTS and stable releases only.  

 

If, and it's a big if, we produced any release candidate containers or beta containers then I can 100% guarantee we won't suppport, help debug or even answer issues regarding them, the workload would be too high.

[CorneliousJD]

4 minutes ago, CHBMB said:

 

No, unless you want to fork it and build it yourself.

 

This seems to generate a lot of angst amongst people but from our perspective we have to be careful, to put it bluntly, Unifi make great hardware and decidedly iffy software with any upgrade a bit like playing russian roulette with your wifi.

 

Our priority has to be not breaking someones install first and foremost if they're running latest.  Add into that the support headache I certainly don't foresee us running release candidates or beta releases.

 

Not quite sure what the long term plan is regarding naming conventions at the moment, but can be pretty sure we'll continue to support the LTS and stable releases only.  

 

If, and it's a big if, we produced any release candidate containers or beta containers then I can 100% guarantee we won't suppport, help debug or even answer issues regarding them, the workload would be too high.

 

While I agree and totally understand. I think there's a lot of confusion because 5.7 is stable? 

 

I think majoirity would love to have a LTS tag (default maybe? Which is what it seems to be now?) And a Stable tag. That would end up installing 5.7 now? Beta would be swell as well, but largely unnecessary IMO. 

[CHBMB]

Yeah, You have to bear in mind when we released this originally there was no 5.7, so any renaming has to not affect those that are perfectly happy and wish to remain on LTS

[dirtysanchez]

8 minutes ago, CHBMB said:

pretty sure we'll continue to support the LTS and stable releases only. 

 

And therein lies the issue.  5.7 is the latest stable release and is listed as such by Ubiquiti.

 

I second the suggestion to have LTS and stable tags, but do understand your statement regarding renaming.

[CorneliousJD]

4 minutes ago, CHBMB said:

Yeah, You have to bear in mind when we released this originally there was no 5.7, so any renaming has to not affect those that are perfectly happy and wish to remain on LTS

For sure! I would love to see LTS remain as the default or primary, and then a new tag that would get users stable releases. Those who want new stable releases could still get them. 

 

Regardless. I appreciate all that LSIO does for us.

[CHBMB]

26 minutes ago, dirtysanchez said:

 

And therein lies the issue.  5.7 is the latest stable release and is listed as such by Ubiquiti.

 

I second the suggestion to have LTS and stable tags, but do understand your statement regarding renaming.

 

When we released the unstable branch 5.7 was anything but stable.

[saarg]

You will get the "stable" 5.7 if you use the unstable tag. As long as you read the Readme, you will get what you want. What the tag is called doesn't really matter. 

[lishpy]

Appreciate the follow up everyone.

 

Regardless of what it's called, if I run 5.7.x ("unstable" or stable) branch, when 5.8.X drops here shortly as the full stable branch as Ubiquiti is calling it, is that line going to update to 5.8.X or am I going to have to make more changes to the Docker setup and pulling from a different track every time Ubiquiti marks a release as stable?

 

My point was more so of how this line is going to progress going forward. Unifi's listing here:

 

UniFi Controller 5.9 (Testing)

We recently shared a testing release of the 5.9 line. This version is still under development. Our main goal is to give you a better overview of your Wi-Fi setup.

 

UniFi Controller 5.8 (Stable Candidate)

We added couple new features to the 5.8 line:

 

UniFi Controller 5.7 (Stable)

Amongst many performance and stability improvements we also added these features to the 5.7 line:

 

UniFi Controller 5.6 (LTS)

Long-Term Support (LTS) release with security updates and critical bug fixes.

 

I'm running AP's which in the next firmware version will absolutely require the 5.7.X controller line, which is why I asked. I'm not asking for beta support here or even running the betas/RCs, just an outline of how this plans to progress going forward.

 

Thanks for your time, I didn't mean to come off as harsh if that was taken as that.

Edited June 14, 2018 by lishpy

[JonathanM]

9 minutes ago, lishpy said:

Thanks for your time, I didn't mean to come off as harsh if that was taken as that.

Start reading here for some (not all) of the background that caused the reaction to your post.

This has been an ongoing issue, and until they prove they have changed in a meaningful way, many of us are loath to upgrade ourselves into a support nightmare.

[sparklyballs]

52 minutes ago, lishpy said:

Appreciate the follow up everyone.

 

Regardless of what it's called, if I run 5.7.x ("unstable" or stable) branch, when 5.8.X drops here shortly as the full stable branch as Ubiquiti is calling it, is that line going to update to 5.8.X or am I going to have to make more changes to the Docker setup and pulling from a different track every time Ubiquiti marks a release as stable?

 

Given the crappy software that unifi "releases" (in brackets because many times they've pulled "stable" builds before actually listing them on their actual downloads page) and the farce that was the original 5.7 release ,, the word stable means absolutely nothing when it comes to unifi. 

 

We only consider a version as released when it hits the downloads page https://www.ubnt.com/download/unifi 

You can't please everyone and for as many people who want the default tag to be the latest steaming turd release from unifi, there are those who want it to be a lts release  /not bleeding edge 

 

Edited June 14, 2018 by sparklyballs

[CHBMB]

Appreciate the follow up everyone.
 
Regardless of what it's called, if I run 5.7.x ("unstable" or stable) branch, when 5.8.X drops here shortly as the full stable branch as Ubiquiti is calling it, is that line going to update to 5.8.X or am I going to have to make more changes to the Docker setup and pulling from a different track every time Ubiquiti marks a release as stable?
 
My point was more so of how this line is going to progress going forward. Unifi's listing here:
 

UniFi Controller 5.9 (Testing)

We recently shared a testing release of the 5.9 line. This version is still under development. Our main goal is to give you a better overview of your Wi-Fi setup.

 

UniFi Controller 5.8 (Stable Candidate)

We added couple new features to the 5.8 line:

 

UniFi Controller 5.7 (Stable)

Amongst many performance and stability improvements we also added these features to the 5.7 line:

 

UniFi Controller 5.6 (LTS)

Long-Term Support (LTS) release with security updates and critical bug fixes.

 

I'm running AP's which in the next firmware version will absolutely require the 5.7.X controller line, which is why I asked. I'm not asking for beta support here or even running the betas/RCs, just an outline of how this plans to progress going forward.

 

Thanks for your time, I didn't mean to come off as harsh if that was taken as that.

It's simple, just tag your container as :unstable and you can run v5.7

We can name it anything, personally I'm in favour of farmyard animals as tag names.

We'll cross the v5.8 bridge when we come to it.

[saarg]

7 hours ago, CHBMB said:

It's simple, just tag your container as :unstable and you can run v5.7

We can name it anything, personally I'm in favour of farmyard animals as tag names.

We'll cross the v5.8 bridge when we come to it.

 

I would tag them with names of STDs.... 

[tucansam]

1 minute ago, saarg said:

 

I would tag them with names of STDs.... 

 

 

I can't remember why I still follow this thread, but I'm glad I do, because THAT'S funny.

[DazedAndConfused]

I would like to install my own SSL certificates for the controller and I cannot SSH into this docker for whatever reason.

 

I read the page on manually messing around with the keystore file to achieve this, but I would like to know why I am unable to ssh into the controller on Unraid. It seems to be the easiest way.

 

I have assigned a static IP to the docker, but trying to ssh to the Unifi controller gives me an "error refused"

[sparklyballs]

1 hour ago, DazedAndConfused said:

I would like to install my own SSL certificates for the controller and I cannot SSH into this docker for whatever reason.

 

I read the page on manually messing around with the keystore file to achieve this, but I would like to know why I am unable to ssh into the controller on Unraid. It seems to be the easiest way.

 

I have assigned a static IP to the docker, but trying to ssh to the Unifi controller gives me an "error refused"

 

It's not a VM and by far the easiest way to get a command line is docker exec 

 

https://github.com/linuxserver/docker-unifi#info

[DazedAndConfused]

Thank you! I was messing around with that last night and did not realize that I was already in the right place. ?

 

 

Edited June 16, 2018 by DazedAndConfused