Re: [tlug] low power home server

["eredicatorx@example.com" <eredicatorx@example.com>]

On 05/11/2010 08:40 AM, Darren Cook wrote:
> > It's all cool stuff you suggested and it really helps. I realized it's
> > not such a good idea to have my storage on the same box as the router,
> > in terms of security,  so I'll definitely go with a router + NAS setup
> > (separate boxes). ...
> >      
> The counter-arguments are:
>   * Two boxes ruins your goal of low-power;
>   * Are your files any safer if your router is compromised, if the files
>   are on local LAN as opposed to local disk?
>
> Yes, okay, theoretically they are safer as you would configure the NAS
> to not allow access from the router IP address. But, more practically,
> if all your configuration is perfect then your router isn't going to be
> compromised anyway, and the point is moot.
I accomplish this with Xen.

I have a Dom0 on CentOS that runs 3 or 4 Xen DomUs (Cent, Fedora, Win7, and Ubuntu and what ever else I need).

Most of the DomUs are typically 20 or 30 gigs and connect via NFS or SMB for storage to the Dom0 box.
One of the DomU called max101, does squid proxying, dns, firewall and dhcp for the network clients and the only one can be connected to from the Internet.

The problem is that if something that can not be made redundant easily, like a power supply or MB, dies you are without networking services, till the Kuro Necko delivers you a new one.

This setup of AMD2+ Gigabyte Board 4Gigs DDR2 RAM and 3 x 1.5 TB disks cost just over 5 mann about 1 year ago, not including the case.

Consequently the wife who is not a huge supporter of spending cash on the home server, noted when I switched from my OLD P4 box w/a 600 watt PS to a new "Green" 600w PS, that the monthly electric bill decreased substantially but actual numbers were never verified.

Send me a mail if you want more info.

E./