201–210 of 316 posts
Slightly off topic, but it annoys me that protonvpn does not allow split tunnel of DNS to an internal host. It calls this DNS leak protection, which is a good default. But I want to run my own DNS server and I know what I'm doing, and the Proton GUI won't let me.
The GUI app should have a custom DNS option: https://protonvpn.com/support/custom-dns
Nice. I wish pihole or adguard would add support for change DNS records based on the query subnet. I believe this is called DNS views. That way my local devices and wireguard devices can get the correct IP for internal services.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It works for me and I don't use Pi-Hole as a DHCP server or have any of my devices individually configured. I have my router acting as a DHCP server and have it tell clients to use my Pi-hole for DNS. Some routers' default firmwares don't let you do this, but most OpenWRT and Tomato and the like should.
I haven't tried Pi-Hole yet but is there a package for OpenWrt which could offer functionalities equivalent to Pi-Hole? I already run OpenWrt on x86 hardware so I have plenty of RAM and disk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
my biggest gripe with NextDNS is not having an ability to add custom blocklists. I'd gladly pay for it even if there was a paid tier with this feature.
It seems you can add domains to the deny list via their api: https://nextdns.github.io/api/#profiles So atleast there's that.
I'm currently using Blocky as my DNS resolver. It works fine and is super fast because of the fine control over caching, but I'm disappointed with its memory footprint. 400MB for a total blocklist of 1.3M domains
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's also not possible (or not clear) how to have different behavior for different clients There's a menu item for that: Clients. You create a group, add a client to that group, and configure blocking for that group. To have what you want, you create a group that has just one client in it.
It's slightly more complicated. What you are suggesting works if (1) you are using Pi-hole as a DHCP server or (2) all your devices are individually configured to use the Pi-hole IP address for DNS resolution. What's more likely though is that you just point your router's DNS setting to Pi-hole, and in that case there is only one client on the Pi-hole dashboard - your router.
Ideally, you do not run DNS on your router at all, and you also block outbound to 0.0.0.0:53 from anything _except_ the Pi-hole, so that there's no convenient way to get to an unblocked DNS by bypassing it.
DNS-over-HTTP is a bit harder to block, and of course malware could have an IP baked in and so bypass this entirely.
The big feature miss for me in this announcement is baked in support for configuration sync between servers. Redundant DNS is common and it would be nice if pi-hole supported this oob. Making it even better would be an ability to see stats across all synced servers from one location.
I’m using https://github.com/ShiromMakkad/docker-pihole-sync To sync my two piholes. But I haven’t figured out how to keep my third pihole (ip-failover) to get in the loop…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I went from PiHole -> AdGuard -> NextDNS. My patience for tinkering and maintaining wasn't high enough to not just pay someone else to do it :)
The big benefit of running a DNS server locally is caching. Using any external provider means you have to go out to the internet for every single request. With a local server, most requests are fulfilled from the local cache.