this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2025
416 points (99.5% liked)

Selfhosted

46653 readers
1041 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.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
416
Let’s Encrypt Begins Supporting IP Address Certificates (linuxiac.com)
submitted 1 day ago by KarnaSubarna@lemmy.ml to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
51 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Who benefits from this? Even though Let’s Encrypt stresses that most site operators will do fine sticking with ordinary domain certificates, there are still scenarios where a numeric identifier is the only practical choice:

Infrastructure services such as DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH) – where clients may pin a literal IP address for performance or censorship-evasion reasons.
IoT and home-lab devices – think network-attached storage boxes, for example, living behind static WAN addresses.
Ephemeral cloud workloads – short-lived back-end servers that spin up with public IPs faster than DNS records can propagate.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AliasVortex@lemmy.world 52 points 1 day ago (3 children)

That's kind of awesome! I have a bunch of home lab stuff, but have been putting off buying a domain (I was a broke college student when I started my lab and half the point was avoiding recurring costs- plus I already run the DNS, as far as the WAN is concerned, I have whatever domain I want). My loose plan was to stand up a certificate authority and push the root public key out with active directory, but being able to certify things against Let's Encrypt might make things significantly easier.

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 7 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I use a domain, but for homelab I eventually switched to my own internal CA.

Instead of having to do service.domain.tld it's nice to do service.lan.

[–] martin@lemmy.caliban.io 3 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

Any good instructions you would recommend for doing this?

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 3 points 10 hours ago

I just use openssl"s built in management. I have scripts that set it up and generate a .lan domain, and instructions for adding it to clients. I could make a repo and writeup if you would like?

As the other commenter pointed out, .lan is not officially sanctioned for local use, but it is not used publicly and is a common choice. However you could use whatever you want.

[–] eneff@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

use the official home.arpa as specified in RFC 8375

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 3 points 9 hours ago

No thanks. I get some people agreed to this, but I'm going to continue to use .lan, like so many others. If they ever register .lan for public use, there will be a lot of people pissed off.

IMO, the only reason not to assign a top-level domain in the RFC is so that some company can make money on it. The authors were from Cisco and Nominum, a DNS company purchased by Akamai, but that doesnt appear to be the reason why. .home and .homenet were proposed, but this is from the mailing list:

  1. we cannot be sure that using .home is consistent with the existing (ab)use
  2. ICANN is in receipt of about a dozen applications for ".home", and some of those applicants no doubt have deeper pockets than the IETF does should they decide to litigate

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/PWl6CANKKAeeMs1kgBP5YPtiCWg/

So, corporate fear.

[–] qaz@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

FYI you can get a numeric xyz domain for 1$ a year

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

At least for the first year.

[–] clb92@feddit.dk 13 points 22 hours ago

Pretty sure it remains $1. But it's specifically only 6-9 digit numeric .xyz domains.

[–] oasis@piefed.social 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Setting up a root and a immediate CA is significantly more fun though ;) It's also teaches you more about PKI which is a good skill to have.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 2 points 22 hours ago

but for the love of god and your own benefit, put a name constraint directly on the root cert