Re: [openwisp] run openwisp on different ports

[Federico Capoano]

Hi Michele!

It is possible, however, I don't think it can be done easily via the
ansible-openwisp2 role because the port is not configurable:
https://github.com/openwisp/ansible-openwisp2/blob/master/templates/nginx/site-conf.j2#L12-L13

So you would have to do this change on your own.
Changing this would mean also changing the URL in the configuration of the
openwisp-config agent, or the devices will not be able to reach the
controller anymore.

Federico

On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 17:07, Michele Salerno  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Is it possible to run OpenWisp with Let's on ports other than 80 and 443?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michele
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "OpenWISP" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to openwisp+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openwisp/516fb1d6-92c1-45c9-b7c2-e7a762959c02%40gmail.com
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OpenWISP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to openwisp+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openwisp/CAAGgX6K%3Db-QZbT3XuLNj7Un_4qhqm-vwBPdbuL1g6OahnKCjfg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [openwisp] Subdivision rule

[Federico Capoano]

At the moment what you can do is choose a /31.

I created a couple of issues which should make this use case possible:

https://github.com/openwisp/openwisp-controller/issues/842
https://github.com/openwisp/openwisp-controller/issues/843

I hope this is better than nothing.

F.

On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 16:24, Radu Rambet  wrote:

> Actually same idea came to my mind . But i abandoned it as it populates
> with a lot of subnets and makes managing them a mess. Instead of avoiding
> mistakes one may create mistake due to too many subnets generated (one per
> ip per device) son 20 devices allready 20 subnets.
>
> And yes it cannot create /32 network . might be a bug but in my opinion
> doenst matter as that is not the intended functionality.
>
>  [image: subnet1.PNG]
>
> On Thursday, March 14, 2024 at 1:01:50 PM UTC+2 f.capoano wrote:
>
> You can try instructing the rule to create very small subnets (eg: /32 or
> /31) and get 1 IP.
> I remember there was an issue with subnets sized /32 which would not allow
> to get 1 IP but I don't remember if this bug is still there.
> Let me know if you try and if the bug is still there we should open an
> issue and fix it.
>
> Federico
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 at 15:08, Radu Rambet  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 12, 2024 at 3:29:48 PM UTC+2 f.capoano wrote:
>
> The help text tries to explain this:
>
> "indicates how many addresses will be created for each subnet."
>
> So if you have 2 subnets,  you will get 1 ip for each subnet, so you get a
> total of 2 IP addresses reserved for each device.
>
>
> Yes but that creates 2 new subnets for each device and reserves one ip
> from each subnet.
> it should be an option to create one subnet for instance 10.10.1.0/24
> with one IP from the same range to each device
> Eg: xx_subnet1_ip1 should be 10.10.1.1 for device 1 and 10.10.1.2 for
> device 2 . in this way one can deploy more devices in the same L2/L3
> network .
>
> This is exactly waht VPN rule does but only with VPN server.
>
> I was sure that such functionality exists as it is very useful deploying
> large networks.
>
> There are more complcated situations where one would have an DHCP server
> per each device where for example 3rd octet would identify the device in
> range and 4th would be used for individual device assignemnt over wifi. But
> that is just a naming convention.
>
> Unfortunately as is I have to asign manually ip's for each device that is
> not a drama but in order to avoid mistakes automation would help.
>
> Anyhow existing VPN automation is just awsome and saves immense amount of
> work.
>
>
> We currently have 2 built-in subnet division rules:
>
> 1. device: the rule is triggered each time a device is created
> 2. vpn: the rule is triggered each time a device gets a particular
> VPN-client template assigned
>
> I hope this helps.
> Federico
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "OpenWISP" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to openwisp+u...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openwisp/017d4d1b-37f2-4ea6-89d3-892ef51f6706n%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "OpenWISP" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to openwisp+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openwisp/8d4910ed-f81b-4df9-9505-1a5eca1ea108n%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OpenWISP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to openwisp+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openwisp/CAAGgX6K8Ej2RkCya%3DxinqFR4MK963KSUYD1cGhNGOk3SHNi%3Dcg%40mail.gmail.com.

[openwisp] run openwisp on different ports

[Michele Salerno]

Hi,

Is it possible to run OpenWisp with Let's on ports other than 80 and 443?

Best regards,

Michele

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OpenWISP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to openwisp+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openwisp/516fb1d6-92c1-45c9-b7c2-e7a762959c02%40gmail.com.

Re: [openwisp] Subdivision rule

[Radu Rambet]

Actually same idea came to my mind . But i abandoned it as it populates 
with a lot of subnets and makes managing them a mess. Instead of avoiding 
mistakes one may create mistake due to too many subnets generated (one per 
ip per device) son 20 devices allready 20 subnets. 

And yes it cannot create /32 network . might be a bug but in my opinion 
doenst matter as that is not the intended functionality.

 [image: subnet1.PNG]

On Thursday, March 14, 2024 at 1:01:50 PM UTC+2 f.capoano wrote:

You can try instructing the rule to create very small subnets (eg: /32 or 
/31) and get 1 IP.
I remember there was an issue with subnets sized /32 which would not allow 
to get 1 IP but I don't remember if this bug is still there.
Let me know if you try and if the bug is still there we should open an 
issue and fix it.

Federico


On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 at 15:08, Radu Rambet  wrote:



On Tuesday, March 12, 2024 at 3:29:48 PM UTC+2 f.capoano wrote:

The help text tries to explain this:

"indicates how many addresses will be created for each subnet."

So if you have 2 subnets,  you will get 1 ip for each subnet, so you get a 
total of 2 IP addresses reserved for each device.


Yes but that creates 2 new subnets for each device and reserves one ip from 
each subnet.
it should be an option to create one subnet for instance 10.10.1.0/24 with 
one IP from the same range to each device 
Eg: xx_subnet1_ip1 should be 10.10.1.1 for device 1 and 10.10.1.2 for 
device 2 . in this way one can deploy more devices in the same L2/L3 
network . 

This is exactly waht VPN rule does but only with VPN server. 

I was sure that such functionality exists as it is very useful deploying 
large networks. 

There are more complcated situations where one would have an DHCP server 
per each device where for example 3rd octet would identify the device in 
range and 4th would be used for individual device assignemnt over wifi. But 
that is just a naming convention.

Unfortunately as is I have to asign manually ip's for each device that is 
not a drama but in order to avoid mistakes automation would help.

Anyhow existing VPN automation is just awsome and saves immense amount of 
work.
 

We currently have 2 built-in subnet division rules:

1. device: the rule is triggered each time a device is created
2. vpn: the rule is triggered each time a device gets a particular 
VPN-client template assigned

I hope this helps.
Federico

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OpenWISP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to openwisp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openwisp/017d4d1b-37f2-4ea6-89d3-892ef51f6706n%40googlegroups.com
 

.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OpenWISP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to openwisp+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openwisp/8d4910ed-f81b-4df9-9505-1a5eca1ea108n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [openwisp] Subdivision rule

[Federico Capoano]

You can try instructing the rule to create very small subnets (eg: /32 or
/31) and get 1 IP.
I remember there was an issue with subnets sized /32 which would not allow
to get 1 IP but I don't remember if this bug is still there.
Let me know if you try and if the bug is still there we should open an
issue and fix it.

Federico


On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 at 15:08, Radu Rambet  wrote:

>
>
> On Tuesday, March 12, 2024 at 3:29:48 PM UTC+2 f.capoano wrote:
>
> The help text tries to explain this:
>
> "indicates how many addresses will be created for each subnet."
>
> So if you have 2 subnets,  you will get 1 ip for each subnet, so you get a
> total of 2 IP addresses reserved for each device.
>
>
> Yes but that creates 2 new subnets for each device and reserves one ip
> from each subnet.
> it should be an option to create one subnet for instance 10.10.1.0/24
> with one IP from the same range to each device
> Eg: xx_subnet1_ip1 should be 10.10.1.1 for device 1 and 10.10.1.2 for
> device 2 . in this way one can deploy more devices in the same L2/L3
> network .
>
> This is exactly waht VPN rule does but only with VPN server.
>
> I was sure that such functionality exists as it is very useful deploying
> large networks.
>
> There are more complcated situations where one would have an DHCP server
> per each device where for example 3rd octet would identify the device in
> range and 4th would be used for individual device assignemnt over wifi. But
> that is just a naming convention.
>
> Unfortunately as is I have to asign manually ip's for each device that is
> not a drama but in order to avoid mistakes automation would help.
>
> Anyhow existing VPN automation is just awsome and saves immense amount of
> work.
>
>
> We currently have 2 built-in subnet division rules:
>
> 1. device: the rule is triggered each time a device is created
> 2. vpn: the rule is triggered each time a device gets a particular
> VPN-client template assigned
>
> I hope this helps.
> Federico
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "OpenWISP" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to openwisp+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openwisp/017d4d1b-37f2-4ea6-89d3-892ef51f6706n%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OpenWISP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to openwisp+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openwisp/CAAGgX6LQtkiGSpa7ZdoUgDqWj8K%3DtmdgzZXY-TuCh6b-JNGpNw%40mail.gmail.com.