this post was submitted on 12 May 2026
106 points (99.1% liked)

Selfhosted

59149 readers
505 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

  7. No low-effort posts. This is subjective and will largely be determined by the community member reports.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I wanted to move away from Tailscale but found Headscale a bit too convoluted for what I actually needed.

Ended up with a simple WireGuard setup using two VPSes: one as a VPN hub, the other acting as a reverse proxy back into my home lab.

It lets me expose services publicly without any inbound port forwarding on my home connection.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I'm rusty since it's been awhile, but I don't understand why you need two VPSs. I have a similar setup just using one. It was mainly to get around the ISP NAT. My DNS points to the VPS, and it forwards traffic to/from my home server over the WG connection with IPtables rules.

[–] TheIPW@lemmy.ml 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

You're right, and for a lot of people, one VPS is the sensible choice. I actually addressed this in the post:

"VPS1 is my web-facing server. It handles the public side of things. VPS2 is the VPN hub. At first glance, that probably looks unnecessary. Strictly speaking, it is unnecessary. I could have crammed WireGuard onto VPS1 and called it done. But splitting the roles makes the whole thing cleaner.

One machine serves public traffic. The other handles VPN duties. That means fewer networking compromises, fewer chances of Docker or firewall rules becoming annoying, and a clearer separation between the public-facing stack and the private tunnel. It also means I can change one side without poking the other with a stick and hoping nothing catches fire."

[–] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 2 points 21 hours ago

Gotcha, didn't realize it was a blog post haha. As far as my personal experience, I never have to touch it. Once I did a dist-upgrade and broke it, but fixed it with a backup.