Want to throw in blocky (https://github.com/0xERR0R/blocky). Supports modern protocols and easy to configure in one file. Migrated to this from pi-hole and never looked back.
Self-Hosting DNS
31–40 of 72 posts
Re: Self-Hosting DNS
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
DNS is a kind of content. You seem to be quibbling over semantic technicalities.
not really. it's about the blocking occurring in reach of the user (client) or not (infrastructure quirk that has to be worked around)
DNS isn't "infrastructure". It's just a simple key-value store, like Redis or something.
Re: Self-Hosting DNS
#33I run coredns with a blocklist, the config is like 4 lines. What am I missing by not using AdGuard, PiHole and similar?
A funky UI, I suppose and blocklist updating etc. But functionally, nothing, they're doing the same thing.
Re: Self-Hosting DNS
#34Re: Self-Hosting DNS
#35Want to throw in blocky ( https://github.com/0xERR0R/blocky ). Supports modern protocols and easy to configure in one file. Migrated to this from pi-hole and never looked back.
Blocky is great! The maintainers are also really easy to get along with. I had a few features I needed to get off of pihole (cnames, defining DNS via zone files) and they worked with me to plan the feature and were very kind and responsive with reviews of my pull requests :)
Re: Self-Hosting DNS
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
> dns-blocking is evil, no matter who does it. You really ought to expand on that line of reasoning in order to get anyone to take this comment seriously.
see my other comment itt more or less about trustworthy infrastructure
Assuming I am looking at the right comment, you didn't really expand/explain all that much.
If I am correct, your argument boils down to blocking happening outside the direct control of the user. This technically is true, as you don't have an icon in your browser like you would have with an extension.
At the same time, it being outside the control of the user is not really true if the user is also the person in control of the blocking solution. I don't know how it works with AdGuard, although I assume it is the same. Pi Hole offers extensive insights in what requests are being blocked, from which client and when.
This can even be adjusted on a per client level. Making that argument a more theoretical rather than a practical one.
Re: Self-Hosting DNS
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have to forward requests that aren't in your cache, surely? I don't see how you would resolve public domain names otherwise
Yes but to the root servers, not to someone else's cache.
I don't really see how this scales, on a global basis.
Sure, one or two of us running our own resolvers isn't going to hurt, but an extra hundred million or so resolvers would hurt -> at best just causes all the servers targeted by the resolver to add more layers of caching
Re: Self-Hosting DNS
#38Fun project. But I would just use https://pi-hole.net/
I’d like to see a comparison
Re: Self-Hosting DNS
#39Re: Self-Hosting DNS
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
see my other comment itt more or less about trustworthy infrastructure
Assuming I am looking at the right comment, you didn't really expand/explain all that much. If I am correct, your argument boils down to blocking happening outside the direct control of the user. This technically is true, as you don't have an icon in your browser like you would have with an extension. At the same time, it being outside the control of the user is not really true if the user is also the person in contr…
it's a practical argument as soon as someone else has to use it