5 ms·

So... what do you need?

by reso 15y ago

y0ghur7_xxx 15y ago
I am not the GP, but from the top of my head, at the moment, I would like - a self hosted dropbox - a phone that does not send data to google or apple without my consent, and where I can be absolutely sure it does not - a self hosted sync server for my phone (contacts and calendar) - a very fast internet connection to my home (I self host almost everything...) that's it. I am sure once I have those I will need more :)
- sp332 15y ago
  Contacts and calendar should work with CalDAV, which is pretty easy to run yourself. If you want something heavier maybe Zimbra is up to the task. For bandwidth, would you consider hosting stuff on a VPS with better upstream bandwidth, or is that not enough control for you?
- MatthewPhillips 15y ago
  I'm also looking to self-host and have some questions. My too biggest concerns are: 1) In my area a static IP is extremely expensive and outside of my budget. This leaves Dynamic DNS. 2) From what I can tell, Dynamic DNS providers only map 1 domain to your account. I would like the ability point more than 1 domain to my personal server. Can I do this without paying through the nose?
  - sp332 15y ago
    Sure, just register a domain normally (e.g. at www.domain.com use code HAK5 for 15% off if you like). Then point its CNAME record to your dynamic domain name. That way, whoever goes to your new domain will be forwarded (at the DNS level) to your other domain name, which will then be resolved by your dynamic DNS provider to your dynamic IP.
    - MatthewPhillips 15y ago
      Sorry for the vagueness, but I do not want multiple domains to point to the same site. I would like multiple domains pointing to the same server which servers different sites. What I need is the server component that knows which site to serve (or which mail account to route to, etc.)
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
      - sp332 15y ago
        Oh, I see. That's actually pretty common, google "name-based virtual host" for lots of details. I don't think dynamic DNS will affect that.
      - dredmorbius 15y ago
        You can still do that. You host a box via DynDNS and its canonical hostname is, say, "mystatichost.example.com". You decide you want to run a www and an ftp on that domain: CNAME www.example.com and ftp.example.com to mystatichost.example.com. 'www.example.com' is your default host on that server. You decide that you want several entirely different domains, say, example.net, example.edu, and example.org, all running from the same host. You'd again point CNAMES to 'mystatichost.example.com', and on your httpd config, create named virtual hosts for those domains. So long as the http request is for 'example.org' and not 'example.com', the surfer won't know the difference. That's been a part of basic webservers (apache, nginx, etc.) for, oh, well over a decade. Mail/MX can be handled similarly. Your domains' MX records point to 'mystatichost.example.com' as their mailserver. That's how every mail hosting provider in existance does this (say: googlemail.com for anyone using GMail hosted domains). There's absolutely no reason the end-user would know the difference. Again: all very basic Internet plumbing basics.
jwhitlark 15y ago
Dropbox, Github, Google Apps for your domain, blogging, financial services and bill pay, photo + music + text + media storage and playback. Just off the top of my head. I don't want fully self-hosted services, any more than I want fully online services. I want a sandboxed, personal subset of the service that I can add to a physical box I own or a virtual box I rent from a provider. I don't expect a company to give me everything to run on my own hardware, but I want a solution that can take the provider going under, being bought, etc. without tanking the service and having to worry about my stuff ending up auctioned off to the highest bidder. The N2N project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N2n http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N2n is an interesting place to start. I started work of some code to do something like what I'm talking about, but that was before my day job ate my life. https://github.com/jwhitlark/unum https://github.com/jwhitlark/unum I guess the question is can we come up with a system that defines sort of a DMZ between a person and a service, something more than the current all or nothing model. EDIT: Note that I'm not disparaging Dropbox, Github, etc. They've been quite good so far, and I'm happy to pay. I trust them, to a certain extent, it's just that I shouldn't have to trust them. Isn't there some way that we can meet in the middle?
- Wilduck 15y ago
  I would love something like this. Ideally, I would want something that stores all of the content in a single file/folder/partition (I don't care which) and will not render my data inaccessible if I simply copy/mirror it somewhere else. From that point, I imagine a company having an open protocol for accessing my music/pictures/blog posts, and then selling the best client using this protocol. Really, the key for me is less about absolute privacy, but more about the ability to extremely easily take my data and run.
  - jwhitlark 15y ago
    I'm not sure data portability is enough these days. I also need some minimum functionality to remain in the event of a dispute or service shutdown. In the real world, escrow (sort of) fills this need. Perhaps a hybrid Amazon/Heroku that also acted as an escrow agent? Enforcing that apps/services followed the data access rules and made sure that the service would keep running on that instance, even if the company went under? I'd pay extra (up front) for that.

So... what do you need?

by reso 15y ago

So... what do you need?

I am not the GP, but from the top of my head, at the moment, I would like - a self hosted dropbox - a phone that does not send data to google or apple without my consent, and where I can be absolutely sure it does not - a self hosted sync server for my phone (contacts and calendar) - a very fast internet connection to my home (I self host almost everything...) that's it. I am sure once I have those I will need more :)

sp332 15y ago
Contacts and calendar should work with CalDAV, which is pretty easy to run yourself. If you want something heavier maybe Zimbra is up to the task. For bandwidth, would you consider hosting stuff on a VPS with better upstream bandwidth, or is that not enough control for you?
MatthewPhillips 15y ago
I'm also looking to self-host and have some questions. My too biggest concerns are: 1) In my area a static IP is extremely expensive and outside of my budget. This leaves Dynamic DNS. 2) From what I can tell, Dynamic DNS providers only map 1 domain to your account. I would like the ability point more than 1 domain to my personal server. Can I do this without paying through the nose?
- sp332 15y ago
  Sure, just register a domain normally (e.g. at www.domain.com use code HAK5 for 15% off if you like). Then point its CNAME record to your dynamic domain name. That way, whoever goes to your new domain will be forwarded (at the DNS level) to your other domain name, which will then be resolved by your dynamic DNS provider to your dynamic IP.
  - MatthewPhillips 15y ago
    Sorry for the vagueness, but I do not want multiple domains to point to the same site. I would like multiple domains pointing to the same server which servers different sites. What I need is the server component that knows which site to serve (or which mail account to route to, etc.)
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - sp332 15y ago
      Oh, I see. That's actually pretty common, google "name-based virtual host" for lots of details. I don't think dynamic DNS will affect that.
    - dredmorbius 15y ago
      You can still do that. You host a box via DynDNS and its canonical hostname is, say, "mystatichost.example.com". You decide you want to run a www and an ftp on that domain: CNAME www.example.com and ftp.example.com to mystatichost.example.com. 'www.example.com' is your default host on that server. You decide that you want several entirely different domains, say, example.net, example.edu, and example.org, all running from the same host. You'd again point CNAMES to 'mystatichost.example.com', and on your httpd config, create named virtual hosts for those domains. So long as the http request is for 'example.org' and not 'example.com', the surfer won't know the difference. That's been a part of basic webservers (apache, nginx, etc.) for, oh, well over a decade. Mail/MX can be handled similarly. Your domains' MX records point to 'mystatichost.example.com' as their mailserver. That's how every mail hosting provider in existance does this (say: googlemail.com for anyone using GMail hosted domains). There's absolutely no reason the end-user would know the difference. Again: all very basic Internet plumbing basics.

jwhitlark 15y ago

Dropbox, Github, Google Apps for your domain, blogging, financial services and bill pay, photo + music + text + media storage and playback. Just off the top of my head. I don't want fully self-hosted services, any more than I want fully online services. I want a sandboxed, personal subset of the service that I can add to a physical box I own or a virtual box I rent from a provider. I don't expect a company to give me everything to run on my own hardware, but I want a solution that can take the provider going under, being bought, etc. without tanking the service and having to worry about my stuff ending up auctioned off to the highest bidder. The N2N project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N2n http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N2n is an interesting place to start. I started work of some code to do something like what I'm talking about, but that was before my day job ate my life. https://github.com/jwhitlark/unum https://github.com/jwhitlark/unum I guess the question is can we come up with a system that defines sort of a DMZ between a person and a service, something more than the current all or nothing model. EDIT: Note that I'm not disparaging Dropbox, Github, etc. They've been quite good so far, and I'm happy to pay. I trust them, to a certain extent, it's just that I shouldn't have to trust them. Isn't there some way that we can meet in the middle?

Wilduck 15y ago
I would love something like this. Ideally, I would want something that stores all of the content in a single file/folder/partition (I don't care which) and will not render my data inaccessible if I simply copy/mirror it somewhere else. From that point, I imagine a company having an open protocol for accessing my music/pictures/blog posts, and then selling the best client using this protocol. Really, the key for me is less about absolute privacy, but more about the ability to extremely easily take my data and run.
- jwhitlark 15y ago
  I'm not sure data portability is enough these days. I also need some minimum functionality to remain in the event of a dispute or service shutdown. In the real world, escrow (sort of) fills this need. Perhaps a hybrid Amazon/Heroku that also acted as an escrow agent? Enforcing that apps/services followed the data access rules and made sure that the service would keep running on that instance, even if the company went under? I'd pay extra (up front) for that.