[GH-ISSUE #2762] [Feature Request] Multiple IP on server and remote_Ip value

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 13:25:23 -06:00

Owner

Copy link

Originally created by @d-513 on GitHub (Jan 13, 2022).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/fatedier/frp/issues/2762

Describe the feature request

My server has many public ip, I need to define what IP to use with frpc

Describe alternatives you've considered

multiple instances of frps

Affected area

Docs
Installation
Performance and Scalability
Security
User Experience
Test and Release
Developer Infrastructure
Client Plugin
Server Plugin
Extensions
Others

Originally created by @d-513 on GitHub (Jan 13, 2022). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/fatedier/frp/issues/2762 ### Describe the feature request My server has many public ip, I need to define what IP to use with frpc ### Describe alternatives you've considered multiple instances of frps ### Affected area - [ ] Docs - [ ] Installation - [ ] Performance and Scalability - [ ] Security - [X] User Experience - [ ] Test and Release - [ ] Developer Infrastructure - [ ] Client Plugin - [ ] Server Plugin - [ ] Extensions - [X] Others

gitea-mirror

2026-05-05 13:25:23 -06:00

closed this issue
added the
lifecycle/stale
label

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 13:25:26 -06:00

Author

Owner

Copy link

@Becods commented on GitHub (Feb 23, 2022):

293003fcdb/conf/frps_full.ini (L3-L6)

or yongboy/bindp

@Becods commented on GitHub (Feb 23, 2022): https://github.com/fatedier/frp/blob/293003fcdb6a090f9e2919b8e7d1224ab1e41549/conf/frps_full.ini#L3-L6 or [yongboy/bindp](https://github.com/yongboy/bindp)

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 13:25:26 -06:00

Author

Owner

Copy link

@d-513 commented on GitHub (Feb 23, 2022):

293003fcdb/conf/frps_full.ini (L3-L6)

or yongboy/bindp

yes, but you need multiple instances to use many addresses

@d-513 commented on GitHub (Feb 23, 2022): > https://github.com/fatedier/frp/blob/293003fcdb6a090f9e2919b8e7d1224ab1e41549/conf/frps_full.ini#L3-L6 > > or [yongboy/bindp](https://github.com/yongboy/bindp) yes, but you need multiple instances to use many addresses

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 13:25:27 -06:00

Author

Owner

Copy link

@yashodhank commented on GitHub (Apr 4, 2022):

What OP meant is having Multiple FRPS running on different cloud server having their own public IPs and allow FRPC hosting one or many services on local port to use these FRPS to ensure high availability of exit node? correct me if I am wrong. @dada513
I am playing with Traefik to do it right now but wonder if there is any FRPS/FRPC native way of doing it with SSL termination.

In my case I am using Traefik docker container for ssl termination for one FRPS instance at the moment I have not yet tested possibility of having multiple FRPS nodes into Traefik router to achieve high availability.

In my case, I have subdomian.domain.ext is unique exposing local web server using FRPC and FRPS hosted on cloud server behind Traefik router (in docker) is terminating SSL as well as working as revers proxy for FRPS connection from internet; So with Traefik load balancer configuration is technically possible but I am yet to test it with multiple FRPS hosted on different cloud instances.
Thank you

@yashodhank commented on GitHub (Apr 4, 2022): What OP meant is having Multiple FRPS running on different cloud server having their own public IPs and allow FRPC hosting one or many services on local port to use these FRPS to ensure high availability of exit node? correct me if I am wrong. @dada513 I am playing with Traefik to do it right now but wonder if there is any FRPS/FRPC native way of doing it with SSL termination. In my case I am using Traefik docker container for ssl termination for one FRPS instance at the moment I have not yet tested possibility of having multiple FRPS nodes into Traefik router to achieve high availability. In my case, I have `subdomian.domain.ext` is unique exposing local web server using FRPC and FRPS hosted on cloud server behind Traefik router (in docker) is terminating SSL as well as working as revers proxy for FRPS connection from internet; So with Traefik load balancer configuration is technically possible but I am yet to test it with multiple FRPS hosted on different cloud instances. Thank you

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 13:25:28 -06:00

Author

Owner

Copy link

@Nour963 commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2022):

@yashodhank any news of that ?

@Nour963 commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2022): > @yashodhank any news of that ?

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 13:25:28 -06:00

Author

Owner

Copy link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jul 31, 2023):

Issues go stale after 30d of inactivity. Stale issues rot after an additional 7d of inactivity and eventually close.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jul 31, 2023): Issues go stale after 30d of inactivity. Stale issues rot after an additional 7d of inactivity and eventually close.

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 13:25:29 -06:00

Author

Owner

Copy link

@yashodhank commented on GitHub (Jul 31, 2023):

@Nour963 I was able to get it working for my own use case in limited way as natively FRP does not support it at the moment.
I have implemented Docker-swarm, Traefik as load balancer and gateway for FRP Server instances running on remote nodes on any popular cloud providers. Where as FRP Clients are connecting to one such server instance to make services available to/from internet.

@yashodhank commented on GitHub (Jul 31, 2023): @Nour963 I was able to get it working for my own use case in limited way as natively FRP does not support it at the moment. I have implemented Docker-swarm, Traefik as load balancer and gateway for FRP Server instances running on remote nodes on any popular cloud providers. Where as FRP Clients are connecting to one such server instance to make services available to/from internet.

gitea-mirror commented

2026-05-05 13:25:29 -06:00

Author

Owner

Copy link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2023):

Issues go stale after 30d of inactivity. Stale issues rot after an additional 7d of inactivity and eventually close.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2023): Issues go stale after 30d of inactivity. Stale issues rot after an additional 7d of inactivity and eventually close.

No Branch/Tag specified