this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2026
36 points (95.0% liked)

Selfhosted

61853 readers
404 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:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
ayyy@sh.itjust.works
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus
curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world
36
Do you know a remote NAS backup solution without Tailscale? (discuss.tchncs.de)
submitted 1 day ago by lucullus@discuss.tchncs.de to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
19 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I currently use Borg for all my backups. To have a remote backup I placed my old Synology NAS at a family member and connected it to tailscale (via a tailscale docker container). That way I could also can do Borg backups to that remote NAS.

Though I have problems with the stability of the tailscale connection from the NAS. And honestly, I'm a bit tired to fix these problems.

I would like to have a self hosted backup solution, that can reach the synology NAS. I would like to avoid port forwarding at my family members network (for obvious reasons). I have a VPS in the internet that I can use for a common self hosted contact point (like I setup headscale there instead of using official Tailscale servers).

What would be your way for handling these remote backups?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I mean it's a commercial product - if stability issues were a common thing, that would be well known and published.

It's a mesh VPN so it generally has the same stability challenges as any other: Hamachi, Nord, Meshnet, Wireguard (which is the underlying protocol that Tailscale uses).

If the Tailscale client is running on the NAS itself, I'd consider that the first thing to troubleshoot.

NAS's generally don't have much extra processing power, and in my experience apps designed to run on them aren't the most robust. In this case, the VM/dock client has to consume all TS traffic, perform the encrypt/decrypt, put it back on the net (even if it's only with the virtual net) over to Borg, which then has to write to the NAS. The NAS hardware has to do all this, with whatever little bit of ram it came with, also while writing all these changes, managing stripes, etc.

While they advertise these things can run stuff like this, it just seems like an opportunity for performance issues when the processing power design was for a NAS/RAID.

I have an ancient NAS on my network that could probably run the TS client, I just don't bother. TS runs on all desktops and servers (for general access), but connectivity to non-TS devices goes through the server running as a TS router. That can be run on any device running TS - it's just a feature to enable and configure.