UNRAID - Unable to access webGUI

English Network/Internet
1

Morning,

These are my current settings, simple home network using WORKGROUP, I have two UNRAID (Desktop: towerNAS, Laptop: towerVMs), server equipment (later), just testing to learn NAS. The confusing thing is the mixed accessing of the Network and** Shares** folders. I replaced my Windows 10 Pro with openSUSE Tumbleweed, read a lot of posts in different Forums, but still not able to solve the access problem.

Before: Windows 10 Pro
Access webGUI: Edge, Firefox

  1. Desktop - True
  2. Laptop - True

Access Shares - File Explorer (can’t open Network folder to open Shares)

  1. Desktop - False
  2. Laptop - False

After: openSUSE Tumbleweed
Access webGUI: Firefox

  1. Desktop - False
  2. Laptop - False

Access Shares

  1. Desktop KDE
  • True (Dolphin: can’t open Shares folder, but can access Shares by opening the Network folder) 1. Laptop GNome
  • True/False (Files (Nautilus): can access Network/Shares folders, Dolphin: none)

Firewall
Desktop
Interface: external
Zones:

  • external (samba, samba-client, ssh)
  • public (samba, samba-client)

Laptop
Interface: external
Zones:

  • external (samba, samba-client, ssh)
  • public (samba, samba-client)

Samba Server: Desktop, Laptop
Workgroup: same name for all computers (also UNRAID’s), NetBIOS: <unique name>, Not a DC, WINS: Remote WINS Server (default), Use WINS for Hostname Resolution [checked]

UNRAID:
towerVMs - Local master - Yes
towerNAS - Local master - Yes

What other settings I need to configure to make both OS consistent and able to access the webGUI and Network/Shares folders?

Thanks!..

2

Interesting,

  1. just found I needed to type the full url of towernas.local to access the webGUI…
  2. Files (Nautilus) on both KDE and Gnome can access Network/Shares folders, but I don’t this file manager, no where near the features as Dolphin
3

Just a comment about the fundamental technology of UNRAID…

I find it amusing and interesting that it touts the idea of a dedicated parity drive as a desirable feature.
It’s precisely that configuration that resulted in the limited popularity of RAID 4 all these many years.
UNRAID then says it supports a second parity drive for fault tolerance and eliminating or reducing that single point of potential failure and yes… I’d highly recommend you implement that with its associated obvious drawback (dedicating another entire disk simply for parity and unusable for data).

UNRAID is an interesting idea and probably worth consideration but if I was chasing performance I’d probably consider iSCSI and if I wanted some kind of fault tolerance build on top of that.

NFS and other network sharing is popular because it’s easy to set up and based on a client/server model which means you can largely administer everything on the Server.

Just me…
TSU