Heyo! I previously had this issue with HA, which was fixed when I enabled Websocket support on NPM. A few days ago I stopped being able to access HA externally. I'm not sure what's gone wrong or how to fix it, any help would be appreciated!
#HA gives 503 openresty error when trying to access through Nginx Proxy Manager
1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
Thanks! Does that go in my configuration.yaml?
Oh I already have that in there
If you're having problems with your updates to your configuration:
- Check the troubleshooting steps
- Check your log file - remembering you may need to set logger to
infoordebug - Explain what the problem you're having is - sharing configuration, errors, and logs
In case you don't know where to find the log ☝️
Sorry.
Setting logs to info now and will report back
haha yea I did. Did'nt show anything to do with networking. Hence changing log level quick
If there's a problem with HA's config for the proxy the log will already show it
Nothing relevant there... then check the proxy log
FINALLY!
2024/11/01 09:03:29 [error] 1836#1836: *5 connect() failed (113: No route to host) while connecting to upstream, client: 192.168.0.102, server: ha.trog.co.za, request: "GET /manifest.json HTTP/2.0", upstream: "http://192.168.0.19:8123/manifest.json", host: "ha.trog.co.za", referrer: "https://ha.trog.co.za/lovelace"
I know this is now no longer an HA issue. But any ideas how to fix this?
The proxy can't reach HA, you have a network problem
Thanks for the guidance. I will look into it
Yea I've got no idea lol
Can you ping 192.18.0.19 from the proxy host?
Apparently not:
troggoman@troggoman-Super-Server:/opt/mediaserver/conf$ ping 192.168.0.19
PING 192.168.0.19 (192.168.0.19) 56(84) bytes of data.
From 192.168.0.18 icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable
From 192.168.0.18 icmp_seq=2 Destination Host Unreachable
From 192.168.0.18 icmp_seq=3 Destination Host Unreachable
From 192.168.0.18 icmp_seq=4 Destination Host Unreachable
ping: sendmsg: No route to host
From 192.168.0.18 icmp_seq=5 Destination Host Unreachable
From 192.168.0.18 icmp_seq=6 Destination Host Unreachable
^C
--- 192.168.0.19 ping statistics ---```
I'd chase that then
I'm confused though... I've ssh'd into 0.203, but it's sending pings from 0.18?
lol 18 is also my server? 203 is media-server.home and 18 is troggoman-super-server.home. I'm so confused hahaha
Thanks for the assistance though!
You're pinging from the .18 address?
I'm ssh'd into 0.203. I run ping 192.168.0.19 which is my HA server.
The output says From 192.168.0.18 icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable
Then .18 is involved for some reason - check your routes
lol idk man
traceroute to 192.168.0.19 (192.168.0.19), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 troggoman-super-server.home (192.168.0.18) 3061.753 ms !H 3061.705 ms !H 3061.699 ms !H
troggoman@troggoman-Super-Server:~$ traceroute ha.trog.co.za
traceroute to ha.trog.co.za (192.168.0.203), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 media-server.home (192.168.0.203) 1.338 ms 1.224 ms 1.153 ms
troggoman@troggoman-Super-Server:~$ traceroute homeassistant.home
traceroute to homeassistant.home (192.168.0.19), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 troggoman-super-server.home (192.168.0.18) 3052.411 ms !H 3052.345 ms !H 3052.313 ms !H```
Dude
Seriously
troggoman@troggoman-Super-Server:/opt/mediaserver/conf$ ping 192.168.0.19
What feckin' host was that there?
18 is troggoman-super-server.home
No, you weren't
ssh'd into 0.203
PS C:\Users\Troggo> ssh troggoman@192.168.0.203
But it's cool man don't stress. I'll figure it out eventually. Thanks!
I'm confused though... I've ssh'd into 0.203, but it's sending pings from 0.18?
Spoiler.... you weren't
troggoman@troggoman-Super-Server:/opt/mediaserver/conf$ ping 192.168.0.19
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
18 is troggoman-super-server.home
That is why the pings were coming from .18 - you were running the command from that host
I've obviously got a fundamental misunderstanding of networking then I guess.
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1000
link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
inet6 ::1/128 scope host
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
2: eno1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP group default qlen 1000
link/ether ac:1f:6b:e9:68:ec brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
altname enp4s0
inet 192.168.0.203/24 brd 192.168.0.255 scope global dynamic noprefixroute eno1
valid_lft 84131sec preferred_lft 84131sec
inet6 fe80::ca76:8af4:f3a8:d184/64 scope link noprefixroute
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
3: eno2: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP group default qlen 1000
link/ether ac:1f:6b:e9:68:ed brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
altname enp5s0
inet 192.168.0.18/24 brd 192.168.0.255 scope global dynamic noprefixroute eno2
valid_lft 84130sec preferred_lft 84130sec
inet6 fe80::90d6:38ed:c03:b51b/64 scope link noprefixroute
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever```
Why the fuck do you have two interfaces on the same subnet?
eno1 and eno2 are on the same subnet
Passthrough networking for the HAOS vm
Then the interface shouldn't have an IP
Apologies for screenshot. Here's the nework config for the VM
Type Model type MAC address IP address Source State
direct
virtio
52:54:00:7e:1c:fa
inet
192.168.0.19/0
Direct
eno2
TAP device
macvtap0
up```
FR though don't frustrate yourself explaining probably obvious things to me if you don't want to. I'm not too stressed man. Just wondering why it would have stopped working
I initially tried to connect to the vm like normal but couldn't gain access to it. I couldn't figure out how to get my router to route me to it. So I plugged in a 2nd network cable and just did passthrough.
I am very bad at networking lol
Would actually very much prefer if I didn't need to run two cables to my server haha
There should be no need
That's what I thought too! And then my skill ran out
It was a while ago, but I think the reason I settled on passthrough was because I couldn't get Nginx ProxMan to forward IP's in a different subnet. Or something like that
- Sure you can
- Bridges are on the same subnet anyway