Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    DNS Resolver

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved 2.2 Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED
    186 Posts 44 Posters 142.0k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • M
      mattbunce
      last edited by

      Thanks Phil

      So do you not have a domain set, and therefore your clients are not applying the suffix?

      In the log I provided, I only did one NSLOOKUP to server.vpn - so either the client sent a second request without the DNS suffix or pfSense dropped the local domain portion after not getting a response from the public DNS servers.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • P
        phil.davis
        last edited by

        The client will have tried server.vpn and server.vpn.local on your behalf. So the server sees 2 different requests.
        My pfSenses have their domain as the same as our internal Windows Server AD domain - e.g. internal.mycompany.com - and then a domain override to point internal.mycompany.com to the nearest Active Directory DNS Server.

        Having just 1 internal domain will also resolve the issue you see - at the moment you have a ".vpn" domain and a ".local"domain happening. Then your domain override will be for the domain that pfSense itself is in.

        As the Greek philosopher Isosceles used to say, "There are 3 sides to every triangle."
        If I helped you, then help someone else - buy someone a gift from the INF catalog http://secure.inf.org/gifts/usd/

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • A
          amunrara
          last edited by

          working fine for me

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • M
            mattbunce
            last edited by

            Hmm - strange. I have had to use Phil's trick of directing the server.vpn.local requests to a non-existant server and then letting the server.vpn request go to the correct server. Without this I couldn't avoid the public DNS server being queried.

            Maybe the issue is that I am not using AD? amunrara could you describe your set-up?

            M

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • N
              nzimmers
              last edited by

              I'm a pretty novice user but wanted to provide some feedback and see if there are any suggestions.  I'm currently using 2.2-BETA (i386) built on Thu Dec 04 08:23:23 CST 2014

              when I check Status->Services  several times in a row I see Unbound DNS Resolver running and stopped at various times so it seems like it's constantly stopping and restarting.

              in the general setup, I have Allow "DNS server list to be overridden by DHCP/PPP on WAN" unchecked and "Do not use the DNS Forwarder as a DNS server for the firewall" checked.

              not sure if I have something configured wrong…..

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • H
                Hugovsky
                last edited by

                Check the posts near the end of previous page. Might be your issue.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • MikeV7896M
                  MikeV7896
                  last edited by

                  @Hugovsky:

                  Check the posts near the end of previous page. Might be your issue.

                  Specifically, this one…

                  https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=78356.msg464921#msg464921

                  The S in IOT stands for Security

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • X
                    xbipin
                    last edited by

                    i started using the new dns resolver but im having one issue, i have set to reset the pppoe connection ever night so when this happens, unbound stops working, i get these errors in system log continuously

                    Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] error: can't bind socket: Can't assign requested address
Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] debug: failed address 92.98.234.229 port 61031
Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] error: can't bind socket: Can't assign requested address
Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] debug: failed address 92.98.234.229 port 19660
Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] error: can't bind socket: Can't assign requested address
Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] debug: failed address 92.98.234.229 port 26847
Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] error: can't bind socket: Can't assign requested address
Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] debug: failed address 92.98.234.229 port 26531
Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] error: can't bind socket: Can't assign requested address
Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] debug: failed address 92.98.234.229 port 65308
Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] error: can't bind socket: Can't assign requested address
Dec 11 09:44:44 	unbound: [7669:0] debug: failed address 92.98.234.229 port 19113
                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • R
                      router_wang
                      last edited by

                      Does the resolver also handle IPv6 dns requests?

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • C
                        cmb
                        last edited by

                        @router_wang:

                        Does the resolver also handle IPv6 dns requests?

                        Of course.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • N
                          NobodyHere
                          last edited by

                          We're running the December 10th build. I can confirm issues with a new WAN address breaking unbound. When our PPPoE WAN link gets a new IP address, the resolver will reply with internal IPs set via DHCP clientIDs, but any external DNS lookup made via a system on the LAN fails.

                          DNS resolving on the firewall continues to work, so it's clearly an issue with unbound.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • C
                            cmb
                            last edited by

                            @NobodyHere:

                            We're running the December 10th build. I can confirm issues with a new WAN address breaking unbound. When our PPPoE WAN link gets a new IP address, the resolver will reply with internal IPs set via DHCP clientIDs, but any external DNS lookup made via a system on the LAN fails.

                            DNS resolving on the firewall continues to work, so it's clearly an issue with unbound.

                            https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/4095

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • N
                              NobodyHere
                              last edited by

                              I'm not sure what a message consisting solely of a link to a similar bug report means…

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • P
                                phil.davis
                                last edited by

                                @NobodyHere:

                                I'm not sure what a message consisting solely of a link to a similar bug report means…

                                I think cmb means "it is a known issue and there is a bug report for it".
                                It does really need fixing - as you have described, DNS resolution can stop working on a WAN DHCP address change, if you have an "unfortunate" combination of Unbound in forwarder mode… settings.

                                As the Greek philosopher Isosceles used to say, "There are 3 sides to every triangle."
                                If I helped you, then help someone else - buy someone a gift from the INF catalog http://secure.inf.org/gifts/usd/

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • C
                                  cmb
                                  last edited by

                                  @phil.davis:

                                  @NobodyHere:

                                  I'm not sure what a message consisting solely of a link to a similar bug report means…

                                  I think cmb means "it is a known issue and there is a bug report for it".

                                  Yes, figured that was clear.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • D
                                    dstroot
                                    last edited by

                                    Latest version broke unbound for me - it did not start after the upgrade.  I had to uncheck "Enable DNSSEC Support" to get it to come up.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • J
                                      jbc
                                      last edited by

                                      I have DNS resolver setup to use opendns via dnscrypt-proxy.
                                      I then have firewall rules setup to only allow lan clients to query lan address on port 53,
                                      and block requests to remote DNS'; Everything works in this regard (no dns leaks).

                                      But, if I query an unknown, none existant name, such as qwertyuiopas.dfghjklzxcvbnm
                                      I get:
                                      drill qwertyuiopas.dfghjklzxcvbnm
                                      ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, rcode: NXDOMAIN, id: 40495
                                      ;; flags: qr rd ra ; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
                                      ;; QUESTION SECTION:
                                      ;; qwertyuiopas.dfghjklzxcvbnm. IN      A

                                      ;; ANSWER SECTION:

                                      ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
                                      .      2918    IN      SOA    a.root-servers.net. nstld.verisign-grs.com. 2014122700 1800 900 604800 86400

                                      ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:

                                      ;; Query time: 28 msec
                                      ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1
                                      ;; WHEN: Sat Dec 27 18:05:03 2014
                                      ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 120

                                      And if I ping qwertyuiopas.dfghjklzxcvbnm; It resolves to my WAN ip… (I would expect an unknown host response)

                                      I have "NAT Reflection mode for port forwards" set to Pure NAT, could this be the culprit?

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • D
                                        dstroot
                                        last edited by

                                        I am trying to do the same - can your describe this further?

                                        "I have DNS resolver setup to use opendns via dnscrypt-proxy.
                                        I then have firewall rules setup to only allow lan clients to query lan address on port 53,
                                        and block requests to remote DNS';"

                                        Right now I have DNS (53) blocked outbound from the LAN and Resolver in forwarding mode using OpenDNS.  However DNSSEC is giving me issues.

                                        What was the process to get dnscrypt-proxy going properly?

                                        Best,
                                        Dan

                                        firewall_home_lan_-_Services__DNS_Resolver.png
                                        firewall_home_lan_-_Services__DNS_Resolver.png_thumb
                                        firewall_home_lan_-_Services__DNS_Resolver__Advanced.png
                                        firewall_home_lan_-_Services__DNS_Resolver__Advanced.png_thumb

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • D
                                          doktornotor Banned
                                          last edited by

                                          @dstroot:

                                          "I have DNS resolver setup to use opendns via dnscrypt-proxy.
                                          Right now I have DNS (53) blocked outbound from the LAN and Resolver in forwarding mode using OpenDNS.  However DNSSEC is giving me issues.

                                          DNSSEC != the OpenDNS nonsense that noone else uses. If you want DNSSEC, do not use OpenDNS.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • J
                                            jbc
                                            last edited by

                                            I installed the dnscrypt-proxy package and setup unbound with a forward-zone to 127.0.0.1.
                                            I then setup the dnscrypt-proxy, first using dnscrypt.eu-nl; which worked for a bit, but is unstable, so right now I have it querying opendns while I investigate the dnscrypt.eu issue…

                                            btw. I have dnssec checked. no problem.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.