I may be (probably am) worrying too much about this, but doesn’t that remove much of the benefit of running services in containers? My understanding is that one benefit of containerization is so that if one service is somehow compromised, the others remain isolated, but running the service that allows you inside on bare metal gives single point access to the drives that those other services rely on, and that’s from the most likely point someone could get into your network. Alternatively, if Tailscale is containerized and someone gets in, they have access to the other services’ front ends but not the data they rely on since Tailscale itself doesn’t have that access.

Yes, I believe I made the stupid mistake of not restarting after enabling. Once I did that the warning went away and I was able to enable subnets, but I’m still not able to see my local services (where I try to access via the IP of the host given by Tailscale or the magicDNS address). So, progress!

ETA: I also had removed the advertise exit nodes line and restarted the container with the --reset flag. After the warning went away I re-added the exit node option and I get the warning that it is misconfigured again.

It’s true, and I was wondering if that would be the route I have to go. Good to know it has been a positive experience.

LXC

That was an interesting rabbit hole. I’m not sure if it’s related or not, but maybe I’ll give it a shot once I get my head wrapped around what it really means (though by then they might have developed a fix… and I see how long that’s taken so far)

Misery loves company! Mine is Verizon and there was a setting that was causing me trouble recently, but probably is unrelated to yours (was DNS rebind protection).

No, I thought the routing was to forward the IP from the Tailscale 100.x.x.x subnet(? not sure I’m using that word correctly) to where the resources I want to access are (in my case, my local 192.168 addresses).

Yes, the machine that is running Docker/Tailscale is serving as an exit node and it hosts all the other services I want to access, which are also in containers.

That’s what I was counting on! Guess I just have to look at it as a learning opportunity.

Yeah, I’ve tried the 100.x.x.x IP and their tailscale URLs, neither of which work.

Yes, it does (been checking with sysctl net.ipv4.ip_forward, but guess it’s the same thing). It seems like the issue may be that IPv6 may not be enabled within the container. It’s enabled on the host, but the docker logs say ipv6 forwarding is not enabled.

Thanks, I did check that my machine had IP forwarding enabled, and it does. I also ran those lines to create the config file as well, but that didn’t change anything. And I do have the lines in my compose file to advertise routes.

Sorry for misformatted code.

  tailscale-authkey1:
    image: tailscale/tailscale:latest
    hostname: myhost
    environment:
      - TS_AUTHKEY=xx
      - TS_STATE_DIR=/var/lib/tailscale
      - TS_USERSPACE=false
      - TS_EXTRA_ARGS=--advertise-exit-node,--accept-routes
      - TS_ROUTES=192.168.0.0/24
    volumes:
      - ts-authkey-test:/var/lib/tailscale
      - /dev/net/tun:/dev/net/tun
    cap_add:
      - NET_ADMIN
      - SYS_MODULE
    restart: unless-stopped
  nginx-authkey-test:
    image: nginx
    network_mode: service:tailscale-authkey1

Part of the idea here is to get comfortable with what’s happening here in a safe/unexposed environment before trying something that I would expose to the internet, and I’m of the understanding that you can do it this way (pass it to the internet, which will then return that internal IP that Nginx should route appropriately.