Yep. Very powerful and cost effective routers. Way too easy to screw something up if you don’t know what you’re doing.

I want to make sure I understand your goal correctly. Here’s what I’m getting.

1. You have a wire guard connection that you want to use for outbound traffic from your local LAN.
2. You have a Debian box that serves at the client in this situation.

Here’s the part where I’m a little fuzzy

3. You want to connect to your local LAN using another wire guard connection and have WAN requests routed from clients connecting to your LAN (via wire guard) out the wire guard connection mentioned in #1.

Did I get any part of that wrong?

Edit: NVM. I saw your response to another comment that sounds like this is exactly what you want.

This should be achievable via routing. I actually do the same thing. The main difference is all the work is done on my router which handles both wire guard connections and routing.

At the minimim you’re going to need:

• A NAT rule on your local router to port forward incoming wire guard requests on the WAN to your Debian box. **Assuming the Debian box is also the wire guard server.
• An iptables DSTNAT rule on your Debian box to route local traffic to the LAN gateway.
• An iptables DSTNAT rule on your Debian box to route outbound WAN traffic that does NOT originate from your Debian box to the gateway at the other end of the outbound wire guard connection.

Yes. I rarely have any sync issues.

Personal finance software is tough. It’s costly to develop, even with a very limited feature set. Automatic transaction downloads are a must if you want widespread adoption and that has its own set of complications.

I still use Quicken – which doesn’t get anyone excited since it’s still a Windows (and Mac) desktop app built on an ancient codebase – but I’m a power user and have yet to find an adequate replacement. It’s not sexy but it does the job. I’m more the exception than the rule. The average user probably doesn’t need or care about the same features that I do.

Oddly enough, one of its redeeming qualities is that it runs quite well on Linux through Wine.

This kind of seems like a solution in search of a problem. Most modern high level programming languages are easily readable, ‘english oriented’, and already capable of at least some level of cross platform development.

One of the main problems with any programing language or framework is that flexibility breeds complexity. If they seriously think they’re going to lower the complexity of programming by allowing devs to write programs [essentially] in plain English, and then let AI do the rest, I think it’s a recipe for disappointment.

A good rule for those in leadership, or just for people who want to get along with others in general, is “be at least twice as willing to complement as you are to criticize.”

Sometimes people need to be told when they’ve failed. They also need to be told when they’ve succeeded. In the context of software engineering, the best team leads are the ones who actually take the time to understand the code in your PR and let you know if there’s something specific that they like.

That’s how you know they’re doing their job instead of just speeding through the code review looking for low hanging fruit mistakes.

I would advise against it. Separation of concerns isn’t important until it is. If your host server is unavailable for any reason, now EVERYTHING is unavailable. Having your server go down is bad. Being unable to browse the internet when your host is down and you’re trying to figure out why is worse.

There are also risks involved in running your firewall on the same host as all your other VM’s without adding a lot of complex network configurations.