7 ms·

Just a FYI - many people[0] (including myself) have had serious issues with JetKVM. In my case, I found it is not compatible with all HDMI sources but others j

by breput 11mo ago

Just a FYI - many people[0] (including myself) have had serious issues with JetKVM. In my case, I found it is not compatible with all HDMI sources but others just have unknown "Loading video stream..." issues. [0] https://github.com/jetkvm/kvm/issues/84 https://github.com/jetkvm/kvm/issues/84

ahepp 11mo ago
It's difficult for me to tell how many of the issues in that thread are serious, because there also seem to be a surprising number of people who come back to say "I solved it by enabling h264 in my browser". On the other hand there are people who say "I ordered three, two work and one doesn't" which seems like pretty good evidence there can be real issues with the hardware.
- bradfitz 11mo ago
  I ordered three and they all worked and then one died. Fortunately they replaced it, though.
  - woleium 11mo ago
    this doesn’t seem ideal for a piece of hardware that may go in a remote location.
    - bradfitz 11mo ago
      It doesn't. But judging from forum posts, it seems like it was a common failure mode and it might've been fixed in later hardware revs.
- _factor 11mo ago
  Ordered 2, one was fine, other required a reflash to resolve a black screen. Worked fine across a variety of SBCs and desktops since. Security is not top priority very obviously, but for a quick kvm on a system without bmc, it’s fine. Picks up DHCP quickly and responsive web UI.
hk1337 11mo ago
> people[0] I read that as you were selecting the first record from the people array
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
nerdsniper 11mo ago
I'm excited to take mine apart soon and figure out why this might be happening for those people.
SmellTheGlove 11mo ago
I’ve been using the glinet comet kvm for my homelab and have no complaints. Their cloud is optional and I don’t use it. The built in tailscale client does what I need it to. I use it with their ATX power accessory to manage physical power on/off when needed. Given that these things have bare metal access, keeping them off of the public internet seems wise no matter what though.
- spockz 11mo ago
  Keeping these kind of management devices off the Internet seems prudent. But how do you do that and still get Tailscale to work? Assign the device to a separate vlan that is restricted to only talk to Tailscale? Otherwise, if the device is on your regular network, it will still be connected to the internet.
  - mcsniff 11mo ago
    Use Tailscale subnet routing. Untrusted devices can sit on a separate VLAN or get WAN blocked, you can still reach them internally, and from any other device on Tailscale. You just need to expose the subnet via Tailscale subnet routing.
    - spockz 11mo ago
      Yes that is how you arrange how the device can be reached through Tailscale. What I was wondering was: In order to get the device to talk to Tailscale to be able to reach it you need to give it access to the internet to reach Tailscale. But now I understand your answer and it is to let the device sit somewhere in an enclosed network and then through another trusted Tailscale node route any traffic to it using subnet routing. Thanks!
schmookeeg 11mo ago
Thanks for this. I've been daydreaming about something like this to replace my Lantronix Spider, but... sounds like I'll stick with the steampunk old-tech for a little while longer :)

by breput 11mo ago

ahepp 11mo ago

It's difficult for me to tell how many of the issues in that thread are serious, because there also seem to be a surprising number of people who come back to say "I solved it by enabling h264 in my browser". On the other hand there are people who say "I ordered three, two work and one doesn't" which seems like pretty good evidence there can be real issues with the hardware.

bradfitz 11mo ago
I ordered three and they all worked and then one died. Fortunately they replaced it, though.
- woleium 11mo ago
  this doesn’t seem ideal for a piece of hardware that may go in a remote location.
  - bradfitz 11mo ago
    It doesn't. But judging from forum posts, it seems like it was a common failure mode and it might've been fixed in later hardware revs.
_factor 11mo ago
Ordered 2, one was fine, other required a reflash to resolve a black screen. Worked fine across a variety of SBCs and desktops since. Security is not top priority very obviously, but for a quick kvm on a system without bmc, it’s fine. Picks up DHCP quickly and responsive web UI.

hk1337 11mo ago

> people[0] I read that as you were selecting the first record from the people array

deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]

nerdsniper 11mo ago

I'm excited to take mine apart soon and figure out why this might be happening for those people.

SmellTheGlove 11mo ago

I’ve been using the glinet comet kvm for my homelab and have no complaints. Their cloud is optional and I don’t use it. The built in tailscale client does what I need it to. I use it with their ATX power accessory to manage physical power on/off when needed. Given that these things have bare metal access, keeping them off of the public internet seems wise no matter what though.

spockz 11mo ago
Keeping these kind of management devices off the Internet seems prudent. But how do you do that and still get Tailscale to work? Assign the device to a separate vlan that is restricted to only talk to Tailscale? Otherwise, if the device is on your regular network, it will still be connected to the internet.
- mcsniff 11mo ago
  Use Tailscale subnet routing. Untrusted devices can sit on a separate VLAN or get WAN blocked, you can still reach them internally, and from any other device on Tailscale. You just need to expose the subnet via Tailscale subnet routing.
  - spockz 11mo ago
    Yes that is how you arrange how the device can be reached through Tailscale. What I was wondering was: In order to get the device to talk to Tailscale to be able to reach it you need to give it access to the internet to reach Tailscale. But now I understand your answer and it is to let the device sit somewhere in an enclosed network and then through another trusted Tailscale node route any traffic to it using subnet routing. Thanks!

schmookeeg 11mo ago

Thanks for this. I've been daydreaming about something like this to replace my Lantronix Spider, but... sounds like I'll stick with the steampunk old-tech for a little while longer :)