tomsk
Very Senior Member
Yes understood..... I can count the number of times i have used the fast switch feature on one hand and have never used the alternate blocking list personally .... it just occurred to to me that users on the main blocking list would having recursive dns requests done for them by unbound but users on the alternate list would be using what ever upstream DNS was configured. The server directive in the alternate dnsmasq.conf points at /tmp/resolv.dnsmasq.confSounds like a good use of resources, but as I don't run Diversion you will need to submit a pull-request if you want to allow 'unbound_manager' to accommodate the scenario.
Code:
/opt/share/diversion/.conf/alternate-bf.conf has this content:
START FILE, --- lines are not part of file
---------------------------------------------------
### DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE ###
pid-file=/var/run/alternate_bf_dnsmasq.pid
user=nobody
bind-dynamic
interface=br0
no-dhcp-interface=pptp*
listen-address=10.10.10.5
localise-queries
no-resolv
dhcp-option=lan,3,10.10.10.1
dhcp-authoritative
servers-file=/tmp/resolv.dnsmasq
# /jffs/configs/dnsmasq.conf.add directives #
# start of Diversion directives #
ptr-record=3.10.10.10.in-addr.arpa,10.10.10.3
addn-hosts=/opt/share/diversion/list/blacklist
addn-hosts=/opt/share/diversion/list/blockinglist_fs
log-async
log-queries
log-facility=/opt/var/log/dnsmasq.log3
# end of Diversion directives #
---------------------------------------------------
END FILE
/tmp/resolv.dnsmasq shows
Code:
nameserver 1.1.1.1
nameserver 1.0.0.1
nameserver 127.0.1.1
Doing a pull request would draw on several skills i currently don't possess ( and some i'm very unlikely to ) ...but i'm never one to shy away... so ill have a go, learning along the way, but don't hold your breath