Huh???

Honestly I don’t see your problem, a nuance? Sure! An unsolvable problem? For sure not.

If you want to have your system reachable from the Wan then you will need a domain name. If you have a domain name then it is needed to be resolved by a dns server.

If there is a dns resolver then you would able to update it dynamically every time your ip changes.

True that the time alive of the dns records must be low enough to ensure that an ip change does not let your system down for an unacceptable amount of time.

You got it quite well :)

Have fun with the build

Yeah, but even if they seems to be contradictory messages, they are not.

RAM is always the first resource that is depleted is a nas/homeserver built, more ram or the possibility of expanding the ram is always a safe bet. But for a nas or a non Realtime system ddr4 is also not mandatory.

Reduce the cooling goes into the direction that the system is not going to be under high cpu load, so no need to dissipate, you can even reduce the cpu.

SSD is not necessary for a nas but it will make you VMs or containers snappier.

So coming back to the subject, your cpu is overkill, and therefore your mother board too (it has even support for sli!), having more ram is always good but my opinion is with 16gb you are good to go for a good amount of time (my server runs on 8gb and I don’t experience any problem yet), obviously, your cooling needs to pair your cpu tdp.

SSD or m2 memories are cheap additions, and like somebody else suggested, it is good to have many pci slots even if they don’t go full speed (x16) but will give you the flexibility to add more sata ports or Ethernet connections on the 10gb.

Honestly, if budget is not a concern you can not be mistaken with this built, but I can see potential to spare like 100 bucks in hw and another 100 in bills in next years

Honestly, I have the impression your setup is oversized (knowing nothing about what you want to run)

NAS systems set on idle like 90% of the time unless your are doing really crazy things with de duplication and distributed iscsi for super big volumes, that I have the impression your are not going to do.

You can probably cut the performance/specs to the half and still being good for the following 10 years and the extra that you will save on electricity too.

As a comparison I checked this built against your synology and in the multicore setup is x10 more powerful (https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_celeron_j4025-vs-amd_ryzen_5_5600x)

Just my two cents

Then don’t buy tesla, or force legislation about introducing such feature.

But make yourself a favor and don’t play Russian roulette with something that you can not understandbecause there are not data available.

And for final tip, if you really cares about that then enforce the fsf (fsf.org)

It is not comparable, not even by far.

Assuming your are not a psycho, to safely drive a car is orders of magnitude (in plural) easier than modifying the Sw in a safe and deterministic way.

It is not only that bad people exists, it is about that making a small mistake can kill you

First, second and third most important point is : Tesla needs to allow the connection to an alternative server.

The fourth should be access to the api and data that are exchanged.

You shouldn’t mess with the FW of your own car even for some innocent feature like this one, you don’t know/understand the interactions that may happen between different Sw components and the hw layer, you can not provide a similar of level of testing, including some worst case scenarios, that can make your car unsafe during some problems or unforeseen conditions. And perhaps also, the car could loose its license for driving…

If tesla allows that, then we can start speaking about it. But last time I check on that was not possible

You will need to explain a bit further this statement to mild knowledged internet stranger…

Because the point of waf is exactly about reducing the exposed surface…