this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2023
61 points (96.9% liked)

Selfhosted

40006 readers
716 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
61
Docker Container/Service with Same Port: Best Practices? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 1 year ago by EliteCow@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
31 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I am very new to using docker. I have been used to using dedicated VM's and hosting the applications within the servers OS.

When hosting multiple applications/services that require the same port, is it best practice to spin up a whole new docker server or how should I go about the conflicts?

Ie. Hosting multiple web applications that utilize 443.

Thank you!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] EliteCow@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Thank you! I am using Caddy and was able to define a unique random port for the other containers and access this via reverse proxy!

[–] herrfrutti@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (7 children)

If the containers are all in the same network. You dont need to expose a port.

Lets assume you create a docker network called reverse_proxy and add all your contaiers that you want to be accessed by the reverse proxy to that network (including caddy).

Then you can address all containers through the hostname in you caddy file and the port would be the default configurated port from the container.

So in the end you just expose the caddy container and nothing more.

[–] d_k_bo@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

That wouldn't work if multiple containers use the same port (eg. 8000), right?

Without a docker network, I can just map 8001:8000 and don't have that issue.

[–] aguslr@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, it'd work just fine because each container listens on port 8000 of their own IP address, not the docker server's IP address. Caddy/Traefik just redirects traffic to that port.

[–] d_k_bo@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Okay, thanks! Maybe I'll try it in the future.

[–] herrfrutti@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I've just posted a little example. I'd recommend doing it this way. No more thinking about what port is allready exposed etc

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)