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

    Unbound vs. Pihole

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved DHCP and DNS
    33 Posts 11 Posters 13.5k 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.
    • stan-qazS
      stan-qaz @occamsrazor
      last edited by

      @occamsrazor Runing on a UPS fixes one of the major Pi failure modes, a corrupted SD from improper shutdown. Using one of the pi-hole recommended SD cards with good write endurance avoids many other SD issues from poor quality cards. I haven't moved my logs off the SD but for really busy systems that is also an option.

      Price wasn't part of my Pi 3 consideration, stability, power use and being well understood were. The 4 will work but keep up with the firmware and software updates as they work to solve the issues with the 4, also be cautious in power supply selection with the Rev 1 board, hopefully the USB power configuration will be fixed when they go to Rev 2 but I have heard no dates on when to expect that.

      CPU use and power on the Pi-hole is usually just about at idle levels, DNS lookups are not much of a load. Some of the web based queries and list updates can use about a full core but are both short duration events. Normal load looks to be about 0.25, memory use with 700K list entries is under 30% with the GUI and VNC running.

      Running other stuff is not an issue as long as you can de-conflict any requirements for the same ports/services.

      Probably best to take the pi-hole details discussion to the pi-hole reddit to keep from cluttering up this place with non pfSense info.

      https://www.reddit.com/r/pihole/

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • occamsrazorO
        occamsrazor
        last edited by

        @stan-qaz - Thanks a lot for the detailed information. Am still tempted by the Pi4 for it's beefier CPU in case I want to run multiple services. Will take further questions to the pihole reddit.... Thanks :-)

        pfSense CE on Qotom Q355G4 8GB RAM/60GB SSD
        Ubiquiti Unifi wired and wireless network, APC UPSs
        Mac OSX and IOS devices, QNAP NAS

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • kiokomanK
          kiokoman LAYER 8
          last edited by

          when i have to go to the supermarket to buy the toilet paper i always go with a ferrari 😂
          for the same reason even if the pi3 is more than enought for pihole i personally will buy the pi4,
          the USB-C is not really a big problem, just don't buy any e-marked USB-C chargers, the official one or any chargers coming from a smartphone/tablet that can do 5v / 3a work without problem.
          i didn't have any stability problem on my 3 raspberry pi 4, with kodi /ntp server/wireshark and other services i'm running, personally the only downside i see here is power consumption

          ̿' ̿'\̵͇̿̿\з=(◕_◕)=ε/̵͇̿̿/'̿'̿ ̿
          Please do not use chat/PM to ask for help
          we must focus on silencing this @guest character. we must make up lies and alter the copyrights !
          Don't forget to Upvote with the 👍 button for any post you find to be helpful.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • occamsrazorO
            occamsrazor
            last edited by occamsrazor

            @kiokoman said in Unbound vs. Pihole:

            personally the only downside i see here is power consumption

            I do try and minimise power consumption as much as possible, but then again I'm running a server rack with pfsense router, QNAP NAS, 48-port Ubiquiti switch, Ubiquiti CK2+ controller/surveillance and 3 access points.... so doubt a Pi is gonna make a huge difference to that. Do you have a rough idea of Pi4 power consumption in watts for typical usage?

            Also, how do you find piHole compares to pfblockerng-devel for protection against malware, ransomware, etc (as opposed to ad-tracking)? Are the lists easy to maintain? I really liked pfblockerng but I found issues with lists not downloading after a while and generally had issues with maintaining it after a while.

            pfSense CE on Qotom Q355G4 8GB RAM/60GB SSD
            Ubiquiti Unifi wired and wireless network, APC UPSs
            Mac OSX and IOS devices, QNAP NAS

            kiokomanK 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • kiokomanK
              kiokoman LAYER 8 @occamsrazor
              last edited by

              @occamsrazor
              😂
              Idk, my network is more or less like what you have
              I don't use pihole nor pfblocker, i have suricata on pfsense and bind9 on a server

              ̿' ̿'\̵͇̿̿\з=(◕_◕)=ε/̵͇̿̿/'̿'̿ ̿
              Please do not use chat/PM to ask for help
              we must focus on silencing this @guest character. we must make up lies and alter the copyrights !
              Don't forget to Upvote with the 👍 button for any post you find to be helpful.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
              • johnpozJ
                johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                last edited by johnpoz

                @occamsrazor said in Unbound vs. Pihole:

                Do you have a rough idea of Pi4 power consumption in watts for typical usage?

                To the power question, here I found this

                https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/raspberry-pi-4-b,6193.html
                pipower.png

                Compared to a pi3 b+ its almost not worth even discussing to be honest.. Especially when you compare overall performance differences.. I can not see for the life of my why anyone would buy a 3 vs a 4 currently.. Unless there was something very specific needed to use the 3.. Which off the top - not sure what that could be - maybe a hat a peripheral that didn't work with the 4?? Or maybe can not get a 4 because of out of stock or something, and you want the pi now, so you get just the 3

                So lets say your pi4 was just balls out all the time drawing 7.6 watts.. Lets call it 8.... If you do the math...

                Assuming your elec cost you 12 cents per kwh

                Electricity cost per day: $0.02304
                Electricity cost per month: $0.70128
                Electricity cost per year: $8.41536

                So worse case its going to cost you something like $8 a YEAR to run your pi 24/7/365 with it just balls out running 100%..

                For it to be just doing dns.. your prob going to be real near the idle usage.. So what like $4 a year.. Not sure what you pay for elec... But adjust for your cost... For each cent difference from the 12 cent, about 0.70 a year difference.. At the full balls out 8 watt number.

                If your really wanting to lower the elec cost - just get a zero.. It can more than handle running pihole..

                An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • P
                  perlenbacher @johnpoz
                  last edited by perlenbacher

                  Thanks @johnpoz.

                  If you have a pihole which is set to resolve against pfsense which is DNS resolving from root servers, will the Redirecting all DNS Requests to pfSense rule still work?
                  ie. the rule described here: https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/dns/redirecting-all-dns-requests-to-pfsense.html

                  Do you just need to change the Redirect Target IP to the pihole internal IP?

                  Does the Redirecting all DNS Requests to pfSense work with DNS over TLS, port 853?

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • johnpozJ
                    johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                    last edited by

                    I am not a fan of "redirecting" anything - I would just block anything from talking to anything other than pfsense for dns..

                    But sure you can still redirect anything that might ask something other than pfsense or pihole on 53 to go to pihole - but you prob need to put pihole on a different network than the client is on or you run into some weirdness... There was a thread not that long ago where this came up.

                    As to redirecting some client that tries to go to 1.2.3.4 on 853 for dns via dot.. While you could have have something listening on 853 for dot.. unbound can do this - you never know what the client might be doing to validate - maybe the end dns they are trying to talk to via dot has to be using a specific cert? etc..

                    An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                    If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                    Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                    SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                    P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • P
                      perlenbacher @johnpoz
                      last edited by

                      Hi @johnpoz,

                      yes that makes sense. So maybe use this method instead to block both ports 53 and 853, and enforce only using pfsense for DNS:

                      https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/dns/blocking-dns-queries-to-external-resolvers.html

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • johnpozJ
                        johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                        last edited by

                        yup that is how you would do it..

                        An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                        If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                        Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                        SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • occamsrazorO
                          occamsrazor
                          last edited by

                          There’s a simpler way to do it combined in a single rule, with an alias for the two DNS ports (if you need more than one) and a “!” to invert the meaning, see this post:

                          https://forum.netgate.com/post/791318

                          Hope am remembering/linking correctly, am on my phone at the moment...

                          pfSense CE on Qotom Q355G4 8GB RAM/60GB SSD
                          Ubiquiti Unifi wired and wireless network, APC UPSs
                          Mac OSX and IOS devices, QNAP NAS

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • johnpozJ
                            johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                            last edited by johnpoz

                            @occamsrazor said in Unbound vs. Pihole:

                            There’s a simpler way to do it combined in a single rule

                            Wouldn't call it simpler exactly, but sure you could do it with a bang rule as well.. As long as no vips running that might mess up the ! rule... Is always cleaner and easier to read when your explicit with what you block and what you allow.

                            An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                            If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                            Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                            SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                            occamsrazorO 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • occamsrazorO
                              occamsrazor @johnpoz
                              last edited by

                              @johnpoz I just find it cleaner because it is one single rule, rather than the two in the docs but I guess either is fine. Could you explain "As long as no vips running that might mess up the ! rule" am not sure I understand what "vips" is here....

                              Also, thanks for finding that Pi power consumption chart - very useful indeed, and yes - power consumption differences virtually insignificant compared to what else I am running.

                              FYI for piHole users, not sure what to think of this? https://www.zdnet.com/article/pi-hole-drops-support-for-ad-blocklists-used-by-browser-based-ad-blockers/

                              pfSense CE on Qotom Q355G4 8GB RAM/60GB SSD
                              Ubiquiti Unifi wired and wireless network, APC UPSs
                              Mac OSX and IOS devices, QNAP NAS

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • johnpozJ
                                johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator
                                last edited by

                                Here
                                https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/6799

                                And here is thread where me and derelict discussed it.. I am a fan of using the ! rule, but if your going to use them you have to make sure to double check your not running into any issues.

                                https://forum.netgate.com/topic/128202/invert-match-doesn-t-work

                                An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                                If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                                Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                                SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

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