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

    DNS Resolver

    2.2 Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED
    44
    186
    124.2k
    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.
    • MikeV7896M
      MikeV7896
      last edited by

      Ok, so it's just reloading the config then… the PID remained the same until about 19:22 this evening, and it changed then because one of my interfaces bounced. Nothing else in the normal system log lined up with the Resolver log.

      Any thought on why the hourly config reload then? Could it be related to including DHCP hosts?

      The S in IOT stands for Security

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

        DHCP renewals update Unbound's config and reload it, I'm sure that's all that is. dnsmasq is the same. It's not restarting the service and won't cause DNS to fail.

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

          Hi - Sorry to be cheeky, I was wondering if anyone had any idea what might be going wrong in my case when using Domain Overrides to send specific domain queries to a different DNS server. (You can see more in my post above…)

          @mattbunce:

          It seems strange that DNS resolver has identified this as a query that should be sent via the VPN, but it still sends it to the main DNS servers?

          Is anyone else using the Domain Overrides feature and do they also see the requests being sent to the wrong servers before eventually being sent to the correct one?

          Thanks, Matt

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

            Sorry to ask again but is there news about my issue reported back in page 6? Or is just misconfiguration I'm doing?

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

              @mattbunce:

              Hi - Sorry to be cheeky, I was wondering if anyone had any idea what might be going wrong in my case when using Domain Overrides to send specific domain queries to a different DNS server. (You can see more in my post above…)

              @mattbunce:

              It seems strange that DNS resolver has identified this as a query that should be sent via the VPN, but it still sends it to the main DNS servers?

              Is anyone else using the Domain Overrides feature and do they also see the requests being sent to the wrong servers before eventually being sent to the correct one?

              Thanks, Matt

              My system happily sends requests for domain override names just to the specified server.
              In your log, yours is doing that also - server.vpn goes internally.
              But server.vpn.local gets sent externally - you have specified .local as your domain for pfSense/LAN so clients on LAN are getting .local in their DNS suffix searchlist, and trying to append ".local" also when trying name lookups.
              You could also add an override for "local" that points to an internal IP address that does not exist (or to pfSense itself? That might make an interesting loop.) so that anything ending in ".local" does not go to the public DNS.
              DNS Forwarder has an optoin to put "!" instead of an IP address, and requests for that domain are not forwarded anywhere - if the name is not in the local hosts file, then NXDOMAIN is returned. That option is not in DNS Resolver.
              That would be useful to have - I will look in unbound manual and see if it will do it.

              Edit: Add: I think something in the config like:

              local-zone: "local" static

              will tell it that "local." is to be responded to just from pfSense itself - whatever host entries happen to be there that end in ".local" - but non-existent names in ".local" are immediately answered with NXDOMAIN.
              I tried that quickly, in the Advanced box, but unbound is telling me I have a syntax error.
              I also tried

              local-zone "local." redirect

              Still get syntax error message.
              But it looks like it is possible to create an internal zone in unbound that will just return entries it knows about, and NXDOMAIN for things in the zone that it does not know.

              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
              • 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
                                            • First post
                                              Last post