Would it be possible to use ports 443 and 80 for both Adguard Home and Vaultwarden? They’re both on the same machine, Vaultwarden will be in a docker container and Adguard Home not. I’m doing this on an Ubuntu server.
You’re looking for a proxy, a way to divvy out requests between the two containers. The proxy will listen on those ports and then split the traffic to the two other containers (which are listening on 2 different ports)
Start looking into nginx reverse proxy, traefik, or caddy
I’ve just started doing that on my setup this week.
Personally, I went for nginx. Fairly straightforward to get up and running. Suddenly, my containers (as well as a couple of other VMs and devices) have their own host names and no trailing port numbers.
Much tidier.
You could use Nginx reverse proxy and map the proper domain names to the right ports
As others have said, a reverse proxy is what you need.
However I will also mention that another tool called macvlan exists, if you’re using containers like podman or docker. Setting up a macvlan network for your containers will trick your server into thinking that the ports exposed by your services belong to a different machine, thus letting them use the same ports at the same time. As far as your LAN is concerned, a container on a macvlan network has its own IP, independent of the host’s IP.
Macvlan is worth setting up if you plan to expose some of your services outside your local network, or if you want to run a service on a port that your host is already using (eg: you want a container to act as DNS on port 53, but systemd-resolved is already using it on the host).
You can set up port forwarding at your router to the containers that you want to publicly expose, and any other containers will be inaccessible. Meanwhile with just a reverse proxy, someone could try to send requests to any domain behind it, even if you don’t want to expose it.
My network is set up such that:
- Physical host has one IP address that’s only accessible over lan.
- Containerized web services that I don’t want to expose publicly are behind a reverse proxy container that has its own IP on the macvlan.
- Containerized web services that I do want to expose publicly have a separate reverse proxy container, which gets a different IP on the macvlan.
- Router has ports 80 and 443 forwarding only to the IP address for my public proxy
Just as a warning, the macvlan stuff isn’t well documented and seems to have hard limits. I worked with it a couple of years ago and had to eventually read a lot of Docker code to figure some stuff out, and the host was only able to successfully set up 4 macvlan networks at a time - the fifth (and any following ones) were never reachable, even though I used the same scripts as for all other ones.
Things might have improved in the meantime.
Directly no. How would Adguard know the request is for Vaultwerden and suppress the 404?
As others have said, you will need a reverse proxy to make this work. The proxy will listen on port 80/443 and direct the request to the correct application based on path or domain name. Adguard and VW will need to listen on other ports.
If you can assign a second IP address to the network interface, then just do so, and bind the docker container to one, and Adguard Home to the other. Otherwise, the reverse proxy based on the server name is the way.
If you’re using them for your private use them just put them on different ports. Why do you want them both on the same ports?
You’ll have to do this even if you use a reverse proxy. And also for a reverse proxy to work you’ll need domains defined in DNS.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:
Fewer Letters More Letters DNS Domain Name Service/System HTTP Hypertext Transfer Protocol, the Web IP Internet Protocol nginx Popular HTTP server
3 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 14 acronyms.
[Thread #770 for this sub, first seen 28th May 2024, 20:05] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
