Are you trying to learn how this works or just need a landline?

If you just need a landline, the ISP will give it to you. It’s voip anyway most of the way. Just plug regular phone into router done. Maybe needs to be a proper voip phone in which case your ISP will give you connection details. Usually that connects to a voip server running in your router.

I worked at a voip provider so I want to mention: this is not a “set it and forget it”. This is something requiring regular maintenance with pretty strict regulations from the providers side. Like email, most consumer ISPs are very wary about people self hosting it.

If you are “pretty new to networking” this is not the project to start with, because it requires solid networking fundamentals.

If you really want to go anyway, well… You need something like kamailio. You set that up, get a voip phone that you have to program to register itself. Plan a couple weekends for this because those docs are not for the faint hearted and you probably have to read the source to understand it.

Forward SIP and RTP from the internet to your server (do you have a static ip?). Then you need to find a provider that gives you a number and is willing to have residential connect to it. Then you hope your ISP is not blocking those ports.

Then you should set up some kind of monitoring system because those providers are pretty flaky and will tell you stuff is working when, in fact, it’s not.

Revealjs also supports markdown.

It is theoretically possible by using formal verification. Which is getting easier due to lean. But still impractical.

Have you tried introducing unnecessary complexity?

Yes that’s a pulseaudio issue. If you search pulse audio crackle you should find some tips. Something to do with some settings on delay I believe.

EDIT:

Also want to mention that for me, it was a USB port issue.

This may not be so easy, what protocol does the ISP use over fibre? Honestly the network card that you will probably need might already pull more than the modem.

I wanted to create a caching snap proxy and it turns out you have to register it with canonical to get a cert.

This feels like a hacky solution.

Why not use VLANs? You can have just one physical interface and then have VLAN interfaces. You can then use a bridge to have every container have their own interface and IP that is attached to a specific VLAN.

Orca slicer, bambu studio

To be clear: that’s their issue.

I’ve seen this haven’t tried it out though

https://timelinize.com/

Upgraded my gaming system. Feels much snappier.

Everything should run under their own user when possible. This software is not using a privileged port (< 1000) so it doesn’t need root.

The docs seem a bit lazy if that is not recommended, possibly it will try to access some files it does not have access to.

I would recommend something like stalwart, which is just a single binary and works. Gives you a web interface and a zonefile you can just copy paste into your DNS including all correct DMARC DKIM SPF and autodiscovery records.

Setting postfix, dovecot etc. up from scratch can be a bit time consuming and annoying.

Deliverability depends on where it is hosted, many VPC providers IP space is completely blocked in spam filters.

I understand this, but this is inconsistent behavior. You now use 22 inside your network and something else outside. Whenever you create inconsistent behavior, everyone using it has to have an awareness of all these inconsistent behaviors.

Also, it is hard to troubleshoot because the tool most admins would want to use (netstat) will not give you useful information to understand the situation.

If you change it, definitely change it on the server so it shows up in netstat and is consistent.

The idea behind keys is always, that keys can be rotated. Vast majority of websites to that, you send the password once, then you get a rotating token for auth.

Most people don’t do that, but you can sign ssh keys with pki and use that as auth.

Cryptographically speaking, getting your PW onto a system means you have to copy the hash over. Hashing is not encryption. With keys, you are copying over the public key, which is not secret. Especially managing many SSH keys, you can just store them in a repo no problem, really shouldn’t do that with password hashes.

This is mostly nonsense.

• Why block outgoing? Its just going to cause issues for most people. If you’re going to do that, do it centrally (hw firewall)
• Why allow http and NTP incoming, when there is no http / NTP server running.
• If there is http server running no mention of https://ssl-config.mozilla.org/ and modsecurity
• If you’re using ufw anyway why not go with applications instead of ports?
• In a modern distro, the defaults are usually sane (maybe except TCP), most of the stuff in the SSH config is already default.
• Why change the SSH port of a home server, which most likely is not reachable from the outside anyway?
• Actually potentially impactful stuff like disabling services you don’t need, such as cups, is not mentioned
• unattended-upgrades not mentioned
• SELinux / AppArmor not mentioned
• LKRG not mentioned https://lkrg.org/
• Fail2ban not mentioned

Don’t just copy random config from the internet, as annoying as it is, read the docs.

If you are sure that every household can only change their own data, and not that of anyone else, meaning there is only one “true copy” for every file, then yes, you can just replicate that to the other locations.

I do not consider Authelia secure from an architecture point of view.

That is because there is, by design, no authentication between authelia and the backend. That means that if anyone ever manages to directly access the backend services, they can impersonate anyone, including admin.

I want to write this in a separate post because I see many questionable suggestions:

Your scenario does not allow for a simple rsync / ZFS copy. That is because those only work with 1:many. Meaning one “true” copy that gets replicated a couple of times.

As I understand you have a many:many scenario, where any location can access and upload new data. So if you have two locations that changed the same file that day, what do you do? many:many data storage is a hard problem. Because of this a simple solution unfortunately won’t work. There is a lot of research that has gone into this for hyperscalers such as AWS GCP, Azure etc. They all basically came to the same solution, which is that they use distributed quorum based storage systems with a unified interface. Meaning everyone accesses the “same” interface and under the hood the data gets replicated 3 times. So it turns it back into a 1:many basically, with the advantages of many:many.