Chameth.com - posts like filament-weight-display, tailscale-docker-gotcha, why-you-should-be-using-https but not exposing-game-servers-over-tailscale

An interesting Tailscale + Docker gotcha

2026-01-29T00:00:00Z

As I’ve written about before, I use Tailscale for a lot of things. I thought I had it set up in a reasonably secure manner, but I recently noticed a problem.

I use Tailscale’s ACLs to limit what each node can access, based on the tags I apply to it. So an app node can’t access anything via Tailscale, while an integration or server node can access things tagged with either app or integration. This is expressed pretty simply in the Tailscale ACL JSON:

{
	"tagOwners": {
		// Servers that can be SSH'd into
		"tag:server": [],
		// Applications that are exposed on tailscale but never connect out
		"tag:app": [],
		// Things which talk to other services over tailscale (connecting to apps etc)
		"tag:integration": [],
	},
	"grants": [
		{
			// Users can access everything
			"src": ["autogroup:member"],
			"dst": ["*"],
			"ip":  ["*"],
		},
		{
			// Servers and integrations can access integrations and apps
			"src": ["tag:server", "tag:integration"],
			"dst": ["tag:integration", "tag:app"],
			"ip":  ["*"],
		},
	],
}

Over the past week I’ve been setting up a private Forgejo instance behind Tailscale, complete with an actions runner that runs things using a docker-in-docker container. I didn’t want the runner knowing anything about Tailscale, so I had it configured to speak to Forgejo direct over HTTP (forgejo:3000) instead of using full Tailscale HTTPS URL that I use when accessing it (http://git.example-net.ts.net/)¹.

Everything was going fine, until I forgot to do that translation… and it worked. My Forgejo action runners could access anything on my tailnet. I run several things on Tailscale that just have authentication turned off, on the basis that only authorised devices can access them. Things like the admin interface for this website. I definitely didn’t intend for any workflow I run on my git server to have access to edit my website!

This wasn’t just limited to Forgejo, either. Any docker container I was running could access the tailnet. In hindsight it’s fairly obvious why: the host is running Tailscale, connected as a node tagged with my server tag. That creates a tailscale0 interface, and automagically sets up iptables rules to route Tailscale traffic over the interface. Docker also automagically sets up iptables rules to bridge traffic, and apparently these two sets of rules interact in such a way that traffic from Docker containers is allowed to route via the tailscale0 interface.

I say it’s fairly obvious in hindsight — there’s no reason why Docker would special case any particular host interface after all — but it still feels pretty surprising. Because both bits of software inject their own iptables rules, I never really had a good mental model for how they interact. The host Tailscale node was a completely separate building block to Docker. It would be a pain to use either of them if they didn’t do these rules, but it’s also one of the reasons I don’t really like “magical” things².

There are lots of ways to fix this, but none of them feel particularly great. You can configure both Tailscale and Docker to not automatically fiddle with iptables and handle the rules yourself, but I really hate dealing with iptables³. As a stopgap I did hold my nose and add some iptables rules to drop traffic to the tailscale0 interface if it originated from the IP ranges that Docker was configured to use:

iptables -I DOCKER-USER -s 192.168.0.0/16 -o tailscale0 -j DROP
iptables -I DOCKER-USER -s 172.17.0.0/12 -o tailscale0 -j DROP

The DOCKER-USER chain is a nice little escape hatch; it comes before the main auto-generated DOCKER chain, and Docker leaves the rules in it alone.

So I added these rules, and felt pretty good about myself, and then… everything started breaking in weird ways. After some debugging I realised the problem was DNS⁴. The server’s DNS resolver is 100.100.100.100, a special Tailscale address. This is so that it can resolve tailnet hostnames via MagicDNS (and so I don’t have to configure my custom DNS servers manually on each device; Tailscale does it for me). My new iptables rules inadvertently dropped all the DNS packets coming from docker containers. D’oh.

Obviously the solution here is to double down and add MORE iptables rules:

iptables -I DOCKER-USER -s 192.168.0.0/16 -d 100.100.100.100 -o tailscale0 -j ACCEPT
iptables -I DOCKER-USER -s 172.17.0.0/12 -d 100.100.100.100 -o tailscale0 -j ACCEPT

This got DNS working again, but it all feels a bit gross. Not least because to actually make these persist you need to use iptables-save, and then you also get all the rules that both Docker and Tailscale have inserted. I came across a script to filter out the Docker ones, but… yuck⁵.

I realised a cleaner idea might just be to lock down what server tagged nodes could access within Tailscale itself. That way I can avoid touching iptables at all. It’s handy to be able to curl services from the host when debugging, but it’s not really necessary. So I removed that access, and… stuff broke again. I’m using my Forgejo instance as a registry for some of the docker images I run, so the docker daemon needs to be able to reach it. I ended up making a new tag for infrastructure, which can be accessed from server devices. This does still allow all the docker containers to reach Forgejo, but I already have it set up with appropriate access controls and public/private repository splits. Forgejo is a service designed to run publicly, so this seems a reasonable trade-off for convenience. I used the tests feature of Tailscale’s ACL config to make sure I’d got the rules right:

{
	"tests": [
		{
			// Servers can only access infrastructure
			"src":   "tag:server",
			"proto": "tcp",
			"allow": [
				"tag:infrastructure:8080",
			],
			"deny": [
				"100.84.16.43:8080",
				"me@example.com:8080",
				"tag:server:8080",
				"tag:app:8080",
				"tag:integration:8080",
			],
		},
	],
}

The whole situation still feels a bit messy. If I ever get around to switching to nftables I might loop back and manually craft some rules for routing traffic, instead of leaving Tailscale and Docker to do their own thing.

I discovered later on that logging into the container registry at forgejo:3000 actually issued a redirect to https://git.example-net.ts.net/ so this was all basically for naught… ↩︎
I didn’t use Tailscale’s MagicDNS for a long time just because the word “magic” put me off. Only when I eventually got around to learning how it worked, and seeing that it wasn’t really that magical under the hood, did I change my mind. ↩︎
nftables seems far better in lots of ways, but I can’t really be bothered migrating. Maybe next time I reimage the server for whatever reason… ↩︎
It’s always DNS… ↩︎
Again, nftables would almost certainly help here. It actually has (gasp) configuration files. But again, I really didn’t want to spend the time migrating. ↩︎

Avoiding the Consequences of Dumb Laws with Tailscale

2025-09-30T00:00:00Z

More and more sites are implementing privacy-invading age checks or just completely blocking the UK thanks to the Online Safety Act.

Protecting kids from some content online is certainly a noble goal, but the asinine guidance from Ofcom, threats of absolutely disproportionate fines, and the stupidly broad categories of content have resulted in companies just giving up or going through a tick-box exercise that offers very little protection but lots of inconvenience and a complete invasion of privacy.

Instead of uploading my ID to some third party company, I’ve taken to proxying my traffic through to a country that doesn’t have such stupid laws. Thankfully, Tailscale makes this really easy. I’ve discussed how I use Tailscale before, but not really covered app connectors. I find Tailscale’s description of these pretty confusing, but they basically amount to automatic, DNS-based subnet routing configurations (or, to put it another way, a per-website exit node). You can safely ignore all references to ‘SaaS apps’ in their docs.

I create a custom app connector, and give it the domains to be included:

App configuration in the Tailscale admin console

Tailscale then magically resolves those domains, and has the ‘connector’ advertise routes for them. Any client that accepts routes will start sending requests to the connector, which passes them onto the Internet at large. Any other traffic is left alone, unlike when you use an exit node.

The special bit here is how you can specify wildcard domains. Tailscale proxies the DNS requests from clients (so it can inject responses for nodes on your tailnet), which means it can dynamically update the routes as you resolve new domains. I tried to set this up more manually, and quickly came unstuck: despite using the same DNS servers, my server and my desktop would get different responses for the same query as it varied by geography. Trying to get the full set of IPs (and keeping them updated) would have been a nightmare. Tailscale expanding the wildcards nicely sidesteps all of that.

At first I was just proxying the traffic to one of my servers, but just today I added a new connector for Imgur and found I was still blocked, just for different reasons. They not only block my entire country but also a load of known datacenter IP ranges. Hmph. I fixed this by hacking up a new side project: tsv. It’s a simple Go app that accepts traffic from the tailnet (advertising itself as both an app connector and an exit node), and passes it on to another VPN.

There are lots of other ways you could accomplish this, but this makes it so all my devices can still access services without any additional configuration. As long as Tailscale is installed, the Internet will still work as it’s meant to, without all the nonsense. If I come across a site that doesn’t work, adding it is trivial: I just make a new app connector in Tailscale.

Obvious disclaimer: the laws in the UK are binding on the service providers, not the end user. Doing this sort of thing in other countries might be illegal. I don’t know; do your own research! Also all of this is a workaround for something that should be fixed at a legislative level, but I’m not holding my breath.

How I use Tailscale

2025-06-25T00:00:00Z

The Tailscale logo

I’ve been using Tailscale for around four years to connect my disparate devices, servers and apps together. I wanted to talk a bit about how I use it, some cool features you might not know about, and some stumbling blocks I encountered.

I’m not sure Tailscale needs an introduction for the likely audience of this blog, but I’ll give one anyway. Tailscale is basically a WireGuard¹ orchestration service, with lots of nice features sprinkled on top. It’s a subscription product, but it has an insanely generous free tier that covers basically anything you’d ever want to do as an individual. They also open source all their client software, and there’s a third party control server implementation called Headscale if you want to avoid the hosted system entirely.

Basic connectivity

At its core, Tailscale lets you easily connect from one device to another, even if they’re not directly exposed to the Internet. You install the Tailscale client wherever you like (on your phone, computer, servers, Raspberry Pi, etc), authenticate the machine with the control server, and it can then talk to all the other machines on the tailnet using their private Tailscale IP addresses.

That isn’t anything revolutionary: it’s the basic premise behind VPNs. But Tailscale makes it so easy. You don’t have to bother with any networking configuration. You don’t have to distribute keys. You just install the client², and login.

For example, my home automation service runs on a Raspberry Pi that sits behind two different routers. I installed Tailscale on it³, logged in, and immediately I could SSH into it from my computer or my phone even when they’re on different networks.

Speaking of SSH, Tailscale has special support for it whereby it handles any incoming connection to port 22 from the Tailscale network, and deals with authentication itself. No public keys or passwords: if you’re logged into Tailscale you can be logged into the machine. This is particularly handy when you SSH from a phone, as proper credential management is a bit of a nightmare there.

Exposing entire machines is just the start, though. If you run multiple services on the machine you need to remember which port they’re all on. Yuck. Instead, you can expose individual services as their own node on a tailnet. There are lots of options for doing so: there’s an official Docker image, a Go library, and many third-party tools (such as my own Centauri and tsp).

Not just a VPN

Exposing individual services wouldn’t be much use if you still had to remember their IP addresses. For a long time I manually added DNS entries for Tailscale nodes, allowing me to connect to http://grafana/ instead of http://100.73.190.100. Recently I switched to Tailscale’s MagicDNS, though, which takes care of that for you. Every machine on the tailnet gets an automatic DNS entry based on its name.

I initially shied off of this because it changes the DNS resolver on every machine it’s installed on, and it all seemed a bit too “magic” for me⁴. I got fed up with manually adding DNS entries though, so I spent a bit of time learning about it and got over my knee-jerk “what on earth is going on?!” reaction. The DNS controls also let you force a specific upstream DNS server. I use NextDNS everywhere, so having Tailscale automatically configure this for me on all my devices was a bonus⁵.

As well as the short names, you can resolve nodes on the tailnet using a slightly longer form: machine.your-tailnet.ts.net. The “your-tailnet” bit is randomly generated, and you can reroll it in the control panel to find a fun one. But why waste time say lot word, when few word do trick? Because Tailscale can make these addresses globally routable, and issue TLS certs for them too.

Say you’re developing something on your local machine, and want to get feedback from someone. You can use Tailscale’s “funnel” feature to expose it publicly:

tailscale funnel 127.0.0.1:8080

With no other options, this will expose the service over HTTPS on port 443. You can then invite people to visit https://machine.your-tailnet.ts.net and they’ll connect through to port 8080 on your machine. They don’t even need Tailscale installed. I don’t use this terribly often, but it’s a great quality-of-life improvement on the occasions I do want to share something.

Tailscale also has a “serve” command, which does much the same but only exposes it over your tailnet. This is how you’d use the Tailscale Docker image to expose a normal service onto your tailnet, but it’s also useful for similar development scenarios. Occasionally I’ll want to test something on my phone, and rather than make sure it’s connected to the right Wi-Fi network, recompiling the app to not bind to localhost, figuring out my machine’s IP, and so on, and so forth, I just run tailscale serve and access it over Tailscale.

Authentication, two ways

One of my minor frustrations with Tailscale was how cumbersome the authentication process was. I logged in using GitHub, and every time I tried to login to Tailscale, I had to bounce through the GitHub OAuth flow and then select which organisation I wanted to use. Even if I was logged in to GitHub, it still shows the permission page every time. It’s not a dealbreaker, but it’s definitely not smooth. This is what it looks like:

Logging in to Tailscale with a GitHub account

Tailscale have since added the ability to sign in with a custom OIDC provider, so I set up a KeyCloak instance, and my login flow now looks like this:

Logging in to Tailscale with KeyCloak as an OIDC provider

It’s a significantly shorter flow, and because KeyCloak is entirely under my control I can configure how long I stay logged in for. It also reduces my reliance on third parties: if GitHub goes down, or decides to ban my account⁶ or something, I can still access Tailscale.

That’s how you log in to Tailscale, but Tailscale can also assist with logging in to other services. If you connect to a HTTP service over Tailscale, it will add in the following headers:

Tailscale-User-Login: alice@example.com
Tailscale-User-Name: Alice Smith
Tailscale-User-Profile-Pic: https://example.com/photo.jpg

A lot of software has support for accepting login credentials provided by a reverse proxy, which is basically what’s happening here. For example, I run a Grafana instance that’s only exposed over Tailscale. Its config (set in environment variables) is:

GF_USERS_AUTO_ASSIGN_ORG: "true"
GF_USERS_AUTO_ASSIGN_ORG_ROLE: "Admin"
GF_AUTH_PROXY_ENABLED: "true"
GF_AUTH_PROXY_HEADER_NAME: "Tailscale-User-Login"
GF_AUTH_PROXY_HEADER_PROPERTY: "email"
GF_AUTH_PROXY_AUTO_SIGN_UP: "true"

So anyone who presents a Tailscale-User-Login header gets an admin account created with that as their e-mail address. It’s super convenient, but obviously make sure it’s only exposed via Tailscale if you do that!

Other services I run that support this include Miniflux (an RSS reader), Jelu (a book tracker), Linkding (a bookmark manager), and Seafile (a file storage system). If you’re hosting something yourself, look out for “proxy auth” or “remote users” in the documentation or configuration. It’s amazingly convenient to be able to access things without entering credentials.

ACLs, tags and mistakes

For a long time I didn’t bother with any kind of ACLs within my Tailscale network. Every machine could access every other machine. Then one day a thought hit me. The default Tailscale SSH config re-prompts you for user authentication, but I’d disabled that by tweaking the config… That means anyone with access to any of my machines (or who managed to get Tailscale credentials out of one of my apps) would be able to SSH into anywhere else on my network. Even as root! Compromising a small bit of my network would immediately lead to a complete take-over. What’s the point in defence-in-depth if you roll out a red carpet over the drawbridge for any attackers?

The first and most obvious fix for this was to restrict root access over SSH. I changed my Tailscale ACL to prompt for reauthentication for root access, but still allow regular SSH unprompted:

{
  "ssh": [
    {
      "action": "accept",
      "src":    ["autogroup:member"],
      "dst":    ["autogroup:self"],
      "users":  ["autogroup:nonroot"],
    },
    {
      "action": "check",
      "src":    ["autogroup:member"],
      "dst":    ["autogroup:self"],
      "users":  ["root"],
    },
  ],
}

This still didn’t sit right with me, though. Why should a random webserver be able to (theoretically) SSH into my desktop computer unchallenged? Tailscale allows you to do more advanced ACLs by applying tags to devices. I dutifully created a bunch of tags, and went through and tagged every device: user, server, app, container, and so on. This, it turns out, was a mistake. I could no longer SSH to anywhere. If I’d read the docs properly, I might have noticed how they describe tags:

Tailscale tags are how you authenticate and identify non-user devices, such as servers and ephemeral nodes. They serve two primary purposes: to provide an identity to non-user devices and to let you manage access control policies based on purpose.

By applying a nice user tag to all of my devices (computer, phone, tablet and so on), I’d effectively removed my own identity from them. They no longer counted for the autogroup:member source in the SSH config. Whoops. And it’s not easy to fix either:

You cannot remove all tags from a device. A device with a tag-based identity must have at least one tag.

So I’d have to remove all the affected devices, then re-add them. At the time I wanted to roll back all the tags, which would mean reconnecting dozens of nodes to the Tailnet. I did end up doing that, but I also took it as an opportunity to switch to KeyCloak as I mentioned earlier. Setting everything up again was a bit less painful when it wasn’t just correcting a dumb mistake.

I now have a much more sensible tag setup: servers are tagged server, apps are tagged app, and a few special apps are tagged integration. I then use Tailscale’s grants to limit access within the tailnet:

{
  "grants": [
    {
      // Users can access everything
      "src": ["autogroup:member"],
      "dst": ["*"],
      "ip":  ["*"],
    },
    {
      // Servers and integrations can access integrations and apps
      "src": ["tag:server", "tag:integration"],
      "dst": ["tag:integration", "tag:app"],
      "ip":  ["*"],
    },
  ],
}

This stops anyone but a user device from accessing servers, and stops plain apps from accessing anything at all. So for example my Grafana instance is tagged as an app; it doesn’t connect out over Tailscale for anything, it only exposes its interface over Tailscale. My home automation software is tagged as an integration, as it reaches out to other services over Tailscale (e.g., to push metrics it receives from devices).

You could go even further and limit which specific machines talk to which others, but I think this tier system sets reasonable boundaries for my use without getting too much in the way.

Even more

There are lots of other cool features offered by Tailscale that I’ve not covered: exit nodes (allowing you to route normal Internet traffic over Tailscale; very handy when you’re behind a router you don’t trust, or if you want to appear as being in another country for totally legitimate reasons); Tailscale lock (a system where existing nodes have to verify any new ones, guarding against both unauthorised access and Tailscale themselves inserting nodes into your network); file sharing, and more I’ve probably forgotten.

As I mentioned before, an awful lot is available on the free personal plan. It’s definitely worth checking out if you manage servers, or self-host anything. I can’t imagine going back to managing servers and private apps without Tailscale, and I’m excited to see what else they do going forward.

If you’re not familiar with it, WireGuard is a modern VPN included in the Linux kernel. It’s basically the only VPN that isn’t terrible. ↩︎
They have installation instructions and packaged versions of the client for just about every device you can imagine: Windows, Mac, every major Linux distribution, iOS, Android, etc, etc ↩︎
They even have an apt repository specifically for raspbian builds, so it’s super easy. ↩︎
Lots of people seem to treat “magic” as a good thing in software. I think it’s the absolutely opposite. I want to know how something works, not for it to be inscrutable! ↩︎
This is entirely optional, of course, you can just let each device do their own thing as well. ↩︎
I don’t think this is likely, but it’s one of my biggest concerns about using “social” logins. More-or-less all of these services can arbitrarily ban you with no recourse; why would you trust them as keyholders to other things? ↩︎

Home Automation Without the Megacorps

2025-05-21T00:00:00Z

I first experimented with home automation in 2016, by picking up a Samsung “SmartThings” hub. It was terrible. The UI to configure things was slow and clunky, firmware updates were applied whether you wanted them or not, and everything stopped working if their cloud services stopped. You were also locked into whatever integrations they deigned to support, of course. After that broke for the umpteenth time I scaled back and for years the closest I got to home automation was a couple of Hue bulbs.

Recently I’ve been building it out again, though. This time using off-the-shelf components that interop using Zigbee, open-source software, and some code I wrote myself. It’s great; it runs entirely locally and has had basically zero downtime. The Zigbee ecosystem lets me integrate all sorts of things without having to spend lots of money on “smart” alternatives. I think I’ve spent less on this incarnation than I did on the original SmartThings hub all those years ago (even without adjusting for inflation!).

My current setup

I run everything on a Raspberry Pi 4, with a Sonoff USB Zigbee adapter based on the CC2652P chipset¹. Interfacing with the Zigbee stack is handled by zigbee2mqtt (z2m for short), an open-source project that basically bridges your devices to an MQTT broker². When a device reports some data, it will send a new message over MQTT; when you want to make a device do something you just post a message back. It’s incredibly lightweight, but supports a huge array of devices out of the box. And as it’s just using MQTT, it’s trivial to integrate with other software or build on top of.

I know a lot of people building out this kind of home automation use Home Assistant, but I don’t get on with it terribly well. It felt incredibly sluggish, and the entire project is just a bit… much. I want a binary or package or docker image I can just run, not an entire operating system. That’s not how computers are meant to work! In contrast, z2m is simple to set up, super light weight and responsive.

Anyway. z2m exposes Zigbee devices over MQTT, so I wrote some code in Go to connect to the MQTT broker, and listen to the messages. It’s grown a bit beyond this now, and I’m skipping some boring bits like error handling and JSON parsing, but at first I had something like:

for {
    message, topic, err := c.ReadSlices()
    
    if string(topic) == "zigbee2mqtt/desk-button" {
        if strings.Contains(message, "single") {
            c.Publish(nil, []byte("{\"state\": \"TOGGLE\"}"), "zigbee2mqtt/room-lights/set")
        }
    }
}

I think I actually made this harder to read by trying to simplify it here, but hopefully you can follow that it was relatively straight forward to listen for a particular action to happen (in this case me “single”-pressing on the device called “desk-button”) and then make another device do something in response (toggling the state of the “room-lights” device).

So what actually are these devices? At present in z2m I have the following:

Some generic buttons
An air quality sensor (USB powered), and a separate temperature sensor (battery powered)
A light switch
Some 240V relay modules, that I use to turn non-smart devices on and off
Some USB relay modules, for the same purpose
Some “smart” plugs that I mostly use to monitor power usage
A motorised blind roller

I think all of these are either Tuya or Moes branded, and were all sourced from AliExpress. You can get the same things from Amazon or elsewhere, but they tend to be 3-4x more expensive for the same product.

One of the cool things about Zigbee devices is that the powered ones work together to create a mesh network, so you don’t have to worry about network repeaters or signal strength like you do with Wi-Fi networks. z2m even makes a map showing the connections:

The network map produced by z2m. You can see how all the powered devices form a mesh that the lower power ones can connect to.

Some interesting automations

A Zigbee relay spliced into the power cable for the fan

So what do I actually do with all of this? Some of it is just what I’ll call “laziness automation”: I want to be able to turn on the lights without getting up and walking to the light switch. So there’s a Zigbee button on my desk that does it. Then there are some less manual automations: my blinds are automatically closed at sunset³, for example. It feels a bit trivial, but it’s surprisingly nice just not to have to think about that at all.

Another nice quality of life automation is the light I have above my monitor. It’s USB powered, and I now have it going through a Zigbee USB relay that lets it be toggled on and off. Then I have a small agent running on my desktop that turns the light on when the computer is unlocked, and off when it locks or shuts down. I keep meaning to make a “film mode” that detects when I’m watching a film, and turning all the lights and blinds down, but I haven’t got around to it yet.

The most complex automation is probably for a window fan. It’s not smart in any way, so I cut the power cable and inserted a Zigbee relay. The whole thing is housed in a little project box to keep it secure. The relay basically acts as a switch: the live wire leading to the fan runs to the “normally open”⁴ contact, while the upstream power goes to “common”. When the relay is told to turn the fan on, the two get connected and the fan gets power. Oh, it’s also not actually a window fan, but I designed and 3D printed some adapters so that it sits right in the window.

So now we have a window fan that can be turned off and on automatically. But I don’t want to have to press a button to do that. I’m lazy, remember? Instead, I made it so that the Go code constantly monitors the temperature reported by the air quality sensor, and queries the free OpenWeatherMap API to get the rough temperature outside. It can then turn the fan on if the room is too hot, and outside is cool enough to make a difference (there’s no point in blowing hotter air in!).

A graph of room temperature, showing the effect of the fan being turned on and off

I don’t want it to do that all the time though. The room doesn’t need to be cooled if I’m not around. There are various Zigbee presence sensors you can get, but the cheaper ones seem to be of dubious quality. Instead, I wrote some code to guess whether I’m present. It uses the state of the monitor light as a proxy for “is the computer in use”, and then makes some guesses based on the last time the computer was used and the current time (if I turn the computer off at midnight it probably means I’m going to sleep; if I turn it off at 2pm it probably means I’m going out somewhere).

You can see in the graph that the fan has a decent impact on temperature. I coded it to cool the room to 19 degrees, but then not turn on again until it was above 20. This prevents it flip-flopping on and off constantly. You can clearly see the pattern in the graph, as it actively cools and then slowly the room warms back up. This arrangement is much better than being woken up at 5am because it’s painfully cold. Trust me.

Bonuses: metrics and 3D printer

One of the things my custom Go code does is collate all the various stats reported by the Zigbee devices, and inserts them into a VictoriaMetrics database. I originally hosted this on the Pi itself, and it performed fine, but I’ve since moved it onto a server so that I can use it for some other things as well.

I set up Grafana to point to VM, and can create dashboards showing power usage, what devices are turned on when, and a bunch of environmental conditions. This also makes it easy to spot how good the data coming from the devices are. For example, the air quality sensor reports a figure for the amount of Carbon Dioxide in the air, as well as the amount of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). The graphs are basically identical, but on a different scale. It turns out this particular device has no actual way of detecting CO₂, so it just “calculates” it from the VOCs figure. Useful to know if you want to actually use that data.

Recently I came across a go library for interacting with Bambu Lab printers, so I’ve also hooked that into my automation. It exports metrics about the printer, so I now have a way of seeing what’s going on when I’m not physically present⁵. I even added a HTTP endpoint (exposed over Tailscale) that shows pictures from the built-in camera.

On the automation front, I’ve made it automatically turn off the printer’s light when it finishes a print, and also added push notifications via PushOver whenever the state changes. No longer will I be sat in another room blissfully unaware it ran out of filament seconds after I walked out the door!

Was it worth it?

These days you could probably just buy some kind of ‘smart home’ hub that works well enough, and do most of what I’ve done with a lot less effort and no coding. I’m still of the opinion that for something so essentially local, it should itself be managed entirely locally. I don’t trust companies like Google or Amazon not to kill their products, or change or remove an API I rely on.

Obviously the “Not Invented Here” approach of coding everything yourself doesn’t suit everyone, but as someone who enjoys coding and enjoys having things work just so it works very well for me.

It turns out the chipset is important. I initially used a similar Sonoff dongle that used a CC2531 chipset, and its performance wasn’t great. It often failed to pair with new devices, and dropped links to existing ones. The zigbee2mqtt docs do explicitly advise against the CC2531 chips for that reason. At the time they recommended CC2652Ps, so that’s what I went with. If you’re starting new I’d go with whatever their latest recommendation was. ↩︎
MQTT is basically a network protocol for publishing and subscribing to arbitrary messages. A broker is the thing that sits in the middle and routes the messages. I use Mosquitto but any will do. ↩︎
They originally also re-opened at sunrise but that was a terrible mistake. Who knew the sun rose so early?! ↩︎
“open” meaning “there’s a gap so it doesn’t work” not “open for business”. This confusion in terminology also extends to drawbridges. ↩︎
I use the printer in LAN mode, which means there’s no way to monitor it from a phone, even if you’re connected to the same network still. ↩︎

Further adventures in 3D printing

2024-08-04T00:00:00Z

The Bambu Labs P1S.

Not quite a year ago, I bought a Sovol SV06 3D printer and wrote about my initial experiences. At the end I joked:

I’m sure there will be more problems, but hopefully I get at least a week or so before anything else goes wrong. Maybe I’ll print an “X days since the last SV06 problem” counter…

That turned out to be more prophetic than I expected. It became a running joke that I’d flip the imaginary “days since” sign back to 0 almost every time I printed. I still really enjoyed having a printer, though: it’s so useful to be able to be able to go from an idea to a CAD drawing to a physical object in the space of minutes or hours. So when Bambu Labs reduced the price of the P1S — a printer generally regarded as about as trouble free as you can get — to £522 including shipping, I splurged on one.

Concerns

I make it sound like that was an easy decision, but I actually ummed and ahed a lot before pulling the trigger. I had a lot of objections to a Bambu Labs printer, and wasn’t quite sure if the price made up for them.

The Bambu Labs printers are designed to be more consumer friendly than most previous 3D printers. You can start a model printing directly from their website or mobile app, which employs a cloud-based slicer that then sends the model down to your printer. This is one of those things that sounds amazing for consumers, but should terrify anyone who works with computers. There are so many ways for a “cloud-connected” printer to go wrong, and with such potentially disastrous results it gives me anxiety just thinking about it.

This is not just theoretical, either. In a blog post with the rather under-stated title of “Initial Investigation in the Bambu Cloud Temporary Outage”, Bambu describe how a server-side error caused printers to start printing unprompted. Users on Reddit reported printers starting in the middle of the night, trying to print on top of other objects that were left on the build plate, and so on. 3D printers can easily start fires; having them cloud controlled is frankly insane.

As a result of that “temporary outage”, Bambu further improved the “LAN mode” for their printers, which allows you to sever its connection from their servers and control it over the network. That’s basically how my old printer worked anyway, so I was happy enough that I could enable LAN mode and ignore all the cloud nonsense.

My other objection to Bambu was more nebulous. Almost all 3D printers are built upon open source software, and some companies like Prusa go out of their way to make their products more open to give back to the community. Bambu don’t really do any of that: I’d be very surprised if they hadn’t incorporated a bunch of open source software into their printers and just ignored the licences¹. I’d much rather give my money to a company doing good, but the only equivalent printer was the Prusa MK4 which was double the price and didn’t come with an enclosure. To add an enclosure kit would have made it £800 more expensive than the P1S, and I just can’t justify that.

Experience

The initial setup of the P1S was a breeze. While the SV06 shipped in parts, the P1S came fully assembled and just needed some packaging and retaining screws removed. These were all clearly marked with large coloured arrows. It’s very much designed so anyone can do it.

I ran through the initial calibration, firmware update, and then put it in LAN mode. Then I just started printing and it went fine. No messing around levelling a bed, or using a sheet of paper to try and set the Z-offset properly; it just worked. It was really loud though. After talking a bit with a friend who’d also bought a P1S, I realised that most of his noise was from the fans, while most of mine was from the servos. A bit of research later and I found out they added servo noise compensation in a firmware update, but I hadn’t run the calibration for it because the initial calibration happened before the update. After doing that, the printer went from sounding like it was impersonating a continental police siren to just being a bit fan-y.

The biggest difference over the SV06 is the speed. I’d swapped the nozzle on the SV06 to a 0.6mm one, and generally printed at a layer height of 0.4mm. The P1S still has its 0.4mm nozzle, and I mostly print at a layer height of 0.2mm. So it’s laying down twice the number of layers, with a nozzle that can extrude half the amount of plastic… And it’s at least twice as fast! Prints that I previously wouldn’t have even attempted on the SV06 are now 8-10 hours on the P1S, without even adjusting the speed or lowering the quality. Here’s a side-by-side comparison:

P1S vs SV06.

The P1S can print eight objects because of its slightly larger bed, while the SV06 can only manage three. The P1S is also printing at a much higher quality. Yet somehow it still ends up being faster. It’s mind blowing.

The other big difference I’ve not mentioned yet is that the P1S is a “core XY” printer rather than a “bed slinger”. That means in order to move along the Y-axis (from the front of the bed to the back), the P1S moves the extruder while the SV06 moves the bed. This makes a big difference when printing tall objects, as they’re far more likely to wobble and come loose when the bed is moving back and forth. It also presumably makes the kinematics a lot easier as the mass of the moving parts is constant, instead of gradually becoming heavier as more and more plastic gets added.

The only failures

I’ve only had a handful of failures since getting the P1S. I had one weird issue where the slicer decided to print some parts extremely slowly, and the print just didn’t work out in those parts; that’s more of a slicer issue, though: after tweaking the model to stop the weird behaviour it printed fine.

The only failure I can directly attribute to the printer was when I tried ironing. This is a process where after printing the top layer, the printer slowly goes back over it at the same height while extruding a small amount of plastic. This is meant to fill in the small gaps between extrusions and give a smooth finish. In my case, though, it just clogged the nozzle and extruder.

At first I thought it was because I was printing too hot: the profile I was using was designed for fast printing, so had to melt the filament rapidly, but there was no way to turn that temperature down just for the ironing pass. I tried another run at a lower temperature and everything clogged again. I then swore off ironing, did a normal print, and everything clogged once more.

At this point I was getting exceedingly good at disassembling the hot end, but also fairly annoyed. It felt like I was using an SV06 again²! I’d previously read some recommendations that you should leave the door or top of the enclosure open when printing PLA, but had never really had any issues so hadn’t bothered. I tried a print with the top propped open and everything worked smoothly again. In hindsight all these clogging issues happened when it was particularly hot and humid outside, which was probably a factor.

Summary

Upgrading to the P1S has made the 3D printer feel more like a tool and less like an additional ongoing project. The speed increase continues to amaze me, as does the increase in quality.

I still think it was valuable to have the SV06 to learn how printers work — you definitely don’t get as much of that from using something so consumer-focused as the P1S — and figure out if I was actually going to use it long-term or whether it was just a fad for me. So it served its purpose, but I’m rather glad to see the back of it in favour of something better in pretty much every way.

And if they did there’s nothing anyone can do about it because copyright doesn’t exist in the same way in China. ↩︎
Although taking apart the P1S (which is a proprietary machine you might not expect to be very user-servicable) was orders of magnitude easier than taking apart the SV06 (which was an open source design). Everything is just much nicer: the connectors are easier to attach and detach, the screws are all a consistent size instead of needing a whole suite of allen keys, and so on. ↩︎