knot-resolver-users

knot-resolver-users@lists.nic.cz

1 participants
214 discussions

Knot Resolver: module view is not able to deal with cache

by Sakirnth Nagarasa

Hi, I am running knot-resolver version 2.0.0 and I would like to redirect (STUB) queries from a subnet to a specific nameserver. For that I created a view configuration for that subnet (see below). A query without being in that subnet caches the answer but unfortunately the cache overrides the answer when doing the same query inside the view. My configuration file looks like that: --- modules = { 'hints > iterate', 'policy > hints', 'view < cache' } view:addr('${SUBNET}', policy.suffix(policy.STUB('${IP}'), {todname('${DOMAIN_SUFFIX}')})) --- Testing procedure: 1) Try to resolve A record being in the special subnet. $kdig @${KNOT-RESOLVER} A www.${DOMAIN_SUFFIX} -> STUB works and answer is correct 2) Try to resolve A record without being in the special subnet. $kdig @${KNOT-RESOLVER} ${KNOT-RESOLVER} -> view is not triggerd and answer is correct 3) Try to resolve A record again within the special subnet. $kdig @${KNOT-RESOLVER} A www.${DOMAIN_SUFFIX} -> The answer is satisfied from cache, which is not the right answer. Is it even possible to do that? Best wishes, Sakirnth

7 let, 10 měsíců

Conditional forward with todname configuration

by Petr Špaček

Hello, I'm going to reply here instead of knot-dns-users. On 7.2.2018 03:24, Yoshi Horigome wrote: > Hello Jay, > > Is it ok to understand that it forwards to "192.168.168.1" which is the > local DNS when asking for localnet.mydomain.com > <http://localnet.mydomain.com>? > > If it is, perhaps, I think that setting should be done as follows. > > --If the request is from eng subnet > > if (view:addr('192.168.168.0/24' <http://192.168.168.0/24'>)) then > if (todname('localnet.mydomain.com > <http://localnet.mydomain.com>')) then > - policy.add(policy.suffix(policy.FORWARD('192.168.168.1'), > {todname('localnet.mydomain.com <http://localnet.mydomain.com>')})) > + policy.add(policy.suffix(policy.STUB('192.168.168.1'), > {{'\8localnet\8mydomain\3com'}})) > else > view:addr('192.168.168.0/24 <http://192.168.168.0/24>', > policy.FORWARD('68.111.106.68')) > > end > end First of all the use of `if` conditions above is incorrect. Examples of view configuration can be found here: http://knot-resolver.readthedocs.io/en/latest/modules.html#example-configur… Second part of view definition is basically a rule from policy module, which has examples here: http://knot-resolver.readthedocs.io/en/latest/modules.html#policy-examples I'm not sure I understood your request correctly, so I will provide snippets and let you to combine them together. -- forward all queries for subdomain localnet.mydomain.com to 192.168.168.1 policy.add(policy.suffix(policy.FORWARD('192.168.168.1'), {todname('localnet.mydomain.com')}) -- forward all queries from 192.168.168.0/24 to 68.111.106.68 view:addr('192.168.168.0/24', policy.all(policy.FORWARD('68.111.106.68'))) This needs to be tested as result will depend on order of modules. I can see that you have policy before view, so it might just work. Give it a try. Petr Špaček @ CZ.NIC > I understand that it is policy.STUB if it is version1, and policy.PASS > if it is version2. > > I am sorry if I made a mistake. > > > Best regards. > > Postscript: > It seems that knot resolver's mailing list has been created, so this may > be better. > https://lists.nic.cz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/knot-resolver-users > > > 2018-02-07 4:46 GMT+09:00 Jay Remotti <jremotti(a)ontraport.com > <mailto:jremotti@ontraport.com>>: > > I'm getting started with knot resolver and am a bit unclear as to > how this config should be structured. > The result I'm looking for is to forward queries to resolver A if > the source is subnet A; unless the query is for the local domain if > so then query the local DNS. > > I've been working with the config below to accomplish this. However > I'm finding that this config will if the request does not match the > local todname and will use root hints if not but will not use the > FORWARD server. > > Ultimately, this server will resolve DNS for several subnets and > will forward queries to different servers based on the source subnet. > > Would someone mind pointing me in the right direction on this, please? > > for name, addr_list in pairs(net.interfaces()) do > net.listen(addr_list) > end > -- drop root > user('knot', 'knot') > -- Auto-maintain root TA > modules = { > 'policy', -- Block queries to local zones/bad sites > 'view', --view filters > 'hints', -- Load /etc/hosts and allow custom root hints > 'stats', > } > > > -- 4GB local cache for record storage > cache.size = 4 * GB > > --If the request is from eng subnet > > if (view:addr('192.168.168.0/24' <http://192.168.168.0/24'>)) then > if (todname('localnet.mydomain.com > <http://localnet.mydomain.com>')) then > policy.add(policy.suffix(policy.FORWARD('192.168.168.1'), > {todname('localnet.mydomain.com <http://localnet.mydomain.com>')})) > else > view:addr('192.168.168.0/24 <http://192.168.168.0/24>', > policy.FORWARD('68.111.106.68')) > > end > end > > > 855.ONTRAPORT > ontraport.com <https://ontraport.com> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Get a Demo <https://ontraport.com/demo>| Blog > <https://ontraport.com/blog>| Free Tools <https://ontraport.com/tools> > > > > -- > https://lists.nic.cz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/knot-dns-users > <https://lists.nic.cz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/knot-dns-users>

7 let, 10 měsíců

Knot Resolver 2.0.0 feature release

by Vladimír Čunát

Dear Knot Resolver users, Knot Resolver 2.0.0 brings lots of changed code, including two bigger new features: aggressive cache and pipelined TLS forwarding. Incompatible changes -------------------- - systemd: change unit files to allow running multiple instances, deployments with single instance now must use `kresd(a)1.service` instead of `kresd.service`; see kresd.systemd(8) for details - systemd: the directory for cache is now /var/cache/knot-resolver - unify default directory and user to `knot-resolver` - directory with trust anchor file specified by -k option must be writeable - policy module is now loaded by default to enforce RFC 6761; see documentation for policy.PASS if you use locally-served DNS zones - drop support for alternative cache backends memcached, redis, and for Lua bindings for some specific cache operations - REORDER_RR option is not implemented (temporarily) New features ------------ - aggressive caching of validated records (RFC 8198) for NSEC zones; thanks to ICANN for sponsoring this work. - forwarding over TLS, authenticated by SPKI pin or certificate. policy.TLS_FORWARD pipelines queries out-of-order over shared TLS connection Beware: Some resolvers do not support out-of-order query processing. TLS forwarding to such resolvers will lead to slower resolution or failures. - trust anchors: you may specify a read-only file via -K or --keyfile-ro - trust anchors: at build-time you may set KEYFILE_DEFAULT (read-only) - ta_sentinel module implements draft ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-00, enabled by default - serve_stale module is prototype, subject to change - extended API for Lua modules Bugfixes -------- - fix build on osx - regressed in 1.5.3 (different linker option name) Full changelog: https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/knot/knot-resolver/raw/v2.0.0/NEWS Sources: https://secure.nic.cz/files/knot-resolver/knot-resolver-2.0.0.tar.xz GPG signature: https://secure.nic.cz/files/knot-resolver/knot-resolver-2.0.0.tar.xz.asc Documentation: https://knot-resolver.readthedocs.io/en/v2.0.0/ --Vladimir

7 let, 10 měsíců

Re: [knot-resolver-users] [knot-dns-users] Knot Resolver 1.5.2 security release

by Daniel Kahn Gillmor

On Mon 2018-01-22 12:42:47 +0100, Vladimír Čunát wrote: > Knot Resolver 1.5.2 is a security release! > > Security > -------- > - fix CVE-2018-1000002: insufficient DNSSEC validation, allowing > attackers to deny existence of some data by forging packets. > Some combinations pointed out in RFC 6840 sections 4.1 and 4.3 > were not taken into account. Thanks for this report, Vladimír! Out of curiosity, are there any test suites available that exercise this particular attack? I'm trying to sort out a backported fix for the version of knot-resolver in debian stable (1.2.0) and enough of the codebase has changed that it's not as simple as just cherry-picking patches f90d27de49c9d3be0424d5d5457fb18df7d5c3f3 and d296e36eb554148f3d6f1f86e8f86ddec81de962, so i want to be sure that any attempted change actually fixes the problem. --dkg

7 let, 10 měsíců

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

knot-resolver-users