That’s Wireguard, no?
Comment on Proxying torrent traffic to homeserver
hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 1 month ago
I think what you're trying to do is called a VPN. Set up a VPN that tunnels all the torrent traffic to and from the virtual server.
0x0@programming.dev 1 month ago
andscape@feddit.it 1 month ago
Yes I already have that set up with Wireguard, what I’m figuring out is how to route traffic through it.
interurbain1er@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
A) Set up a wiregard VPN server in your remote instance. Or better, get a VPN provider, the VPS is kinda pointless.
B) Assuming you’re using docker as you should to run your home server’s service, use gluetun to connect to the VPN and route your docker traffic for the instances through gluetun. This will ensure that you have a dead man switch when/if the VPN goes down.
C) set-up a reverse proxy to access the various instance.
Here’s a fully developed config, you can use a jumping point.
github.com/geekau/mediastack
andscape@feddit.it 1 month ago
I have already set up all of that. My setup is similar to the one in this blogpost and it’s already working for various apps that only use HTTP. What I’m trying to do is to also route BitTorrent traffic (TCP/UDP) over the same setup without opening up entirely new paths.
hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 1 month ago
Usually that's done by the network routing. Add a default(?) route(?) or make the software bind to the vpn interface. I'm not sure. I think firewall rules can do the same thing. If you're ysing docker, I'd advise you to use "gluetun" that seems to do everything for you.
Usually people do copyright violation with bittorrent. That means they tend to make sure the routing or dns doesn't leak anything. I think that's usually done by running the software inside of some containers or virtualization. If you do that your setup becomes a bit more simple. Either use gluetun or make the container bind to the vpn in its entirety. Everything else is a bit more elabotate and complicated...