That site works fine with cloudfare and stubby as well - with DNSSEC configured in stubby
That site does not check your DNSSEC. It checks your configured upstream resolvers aka your DNS servers. You need to use Dig to check your DNSSEC. Plenty of discussion on this in the Stubby thread.That site works fine with cloudfare and stubby as well - with DNSSEC configured in stubby
29af573d44 rc: fix dot with dns_local coexistance
ef28fd4b6a Bump revision to alpha 3
cc7e0d278b httpd: fix potential buffer overrun in alloc_string() (backport from 384_45708)
c00f19e19f webui: restart dnsmasq if user changes any related settings on the WAN page
2c4d4e93ad libvpn: remove unused code in reset_ovpn_setting()
5d5b9d617d webui: do not restart router's time service when issuing a WoL request
41ba8262dc webui: fix layout issue caused by long SANs on DDNS page
a23576df16 webui: enhancements to DNSPrivacy content
7044c273c8 rc: fix ipv6 dot servers validation
43c891cb5e rc: fix dot+dnssec startup & proxying
72f61e1067 webui: do not attempt to apply values if selecting the "Please select" entry in the DoT presets dropdown
33ca4ab60d webui: fix optgroup rendering in Firefox
should i remove stubby installed if i use 384.11?
Thanks a lot!
We point them at the code, make our case for it, and hope they a) like it, b) feel it fits within their plans, and c) decide to go for it.
I did it in the past with the IPv6 firewall implementation, I pitched a case about them integrating it upstream after I implemented it in my firmware, and they decided to go with it. They also sometime pick up parts of my code on their own - the initial OpenVPN support in Asuswrt came from my firmware. They rewrote most of it with 382_xxxx, but a lot of the server webui code is still from that original design.
The new beta 3 ipv6 runs solely by itself --I confirmed testing with only ipv6 and ipv6 resolvers--- note it takes a few moments to take effect.
Has anybody confirmed the DNSSEC features that were modified?
tcp 0 0 (ip):41519 1.1.1.1:853 ESTABLISHED 4417/stubby
it is actually doing double work in fact it is testing what the server has already tested ( just assuming you are using dnssec enabled server) -- this is a good feature though just incase someone highjacks the server you are using and sends you fake signedAlright, I went to https://nil.uniza.sk/how-install-dig-dns-tool-windows-7 and installed dig on my system to test if DNSSEC was actually working since those test sites seem to just test the DNS resolver you are using and what it supports.
With DNS-over-TLS and DNSSEC enabled, then it breaks https://1.1.1.1/help/ where it says No everywhere. So, is it actually using both at that time and the test just can't tell, since DNSSEC by itself does not encrypt anything?
This is very nice and will help many people I think who may test/trial DoT in the future. Would be useful to have a similar warning/note on the LAN>DHCP page if a DNS Server is added and/or not blank.Code:a23576df16 webui: enhancements to DNSPrivacy content
Welcome To SNBForums
SNBForums is a community for anyone who wants to learn about or discuss the latest in wireless routers, network storage and the ins and outs of building and maintaining a small network.
If you'd like to post a question, simply register and have at it!
While you're at it, please check out SmallNetBuilder for product reviews and our famous Router Charts, Ranker and plenty more!