Hi Darren, Hi Nick,
at first thanks a lot for your answer.
I see that I have not explained my use-case detailed enough.
I have bind running for domain fechner.net, but not at home and this
server I think is here completely out of discussion.
If I must not touch it, I do not want to touch it as it would see the
traffic from my local computer from home like any other computer in the
internet and I do not want to open it in any way and it should not know
the setup of my local network at home.
At home I have a bind running. It serves some local zones I use here
internally and is forwarding all requests to the DNS server my provider
is providing.
It is not connected in any way to my bind servers running for domain
fechner.net.
The public IP address (idefix.fechner.net) is due to this routing, NAT
and openvpn not visible on any of my interfaces on my home server.
So if I would like to access idefix.fechner.net it makes a DNS lookup
which returns the A record for idefix.fechner.net and it sees it does
not belong to my interface so it uses the default gateway to go to my
internet provider. It reaches my server in the internet, is routed into
the openvpn tunnel and goes through my local firewall through a policy
based NAT to a local IP (192.168.200.x). So you see that is not very
efficient.
My idea was to hook into the DNS and make sure to not return the IPv4
address 195.30.95.36, but 192.168.0.1 (as all my devices at home are
using my local bind here for lookup).
I hope that explain it better what I would like to solve.
Matthias
Am 07.02.2023 um 07:48 schrieb Nick Tait via bind-users:
Hi Matthias.
It isn't clear whether the issue you're trying to solve is (a)
avoiding DNS resolution going out then in to get to your authoritative
servers, or (b) with resolved addresses of your servers being the
public address which means that data packets sent to/from those
servers are going out then in to get to them?
It looks like Darren has assumed (a)? If that is correct then it is
worth noting that using forwarders like this will require your
authoritative servers to answer recursive queries. If that is
undesirable, you might want to look at using "mirror" zones on your
recursive resolvers? I haven't personally used zones of this type, but
according to the documentation, this has following advantage over
using "secondary" zones to achieve the same thing: /Answers coming
from a mirror zone look almost exactly like answers from a zone of
type //|secondary|//, with the notable exceptions that the AA bit
(“authoritative answer”) is not set, and the AD bit (“authenticated
data”) is./
However I suspect your issue is actually (b), in which case I'd
suggest using views to serve two versions of your zone file - one with
public IP addresses that is served to external clients, and one with
private IP addresses that is served to internal clients only, along
the lines of the following:
# View containing zone with public IP addresses.
view "public" {
match-clients { ... };
zone "fechner.net" {
type primary;
file "../master/fechner.net/*public-*fechner.net";
dnssec-policy "one-year-zsk";
inline-signing yes;
};
};
# View containing zone with private IP addresses.
view "private" {
match-clients { ... };
zone "fechner.net" {
type primary;
file "../master/fechner.net/*private-*fechner.net";
dnssec-policy "one-year-zsk";
inline-signing yes;
};
};
The two copies of the zone are signed using the same keys.
For the sake of simplicity I've glossed over the details of
replicating the two different copies of the zone to your secondary DNS
servers, but the general idea is to have the secondaries use different
TSIG signatures for transferring each copy, and have the
"match-clients" use the TSIG key to figure out which view they are
talking to. Let me know if you need more info about how to set this up?
Nick.
On 6/02/23 01:08, Darren Ankney wrote:
Matthias,
This is what I did to force my resolver bind instance to lookup my
internal domain directly on my authoritative bind instance without
asking any other servers (would have failed anyway as it is a fake
domain "mylocal"):
// on resolver (or caching name server)
zone "mylocal" {
type forward;
forwarders {
192.168.40.142; // authoritative server 1
192.168.40.182; // authoritative server 2
};
forward only; // don't ask any other server
};
Not sure if that will break dnssec for you. There are probably other
way(s) to accomplish this, especially for a real domain on real IP
address(s). But maybe its somewhere to start.
-Darren
On Sun, Feb 5, 2023 at 1:21 AM Matthias Fechner<ide...@fechner.net> wrote:
Dear all,
I have a question regarding a setup I use at home.
It is for domain idefix.fechner.net.
I have at home a small server running with some services at it. As I do
not have a public IP, I tunnel traffic using pf on FreeBSD and openvpn
to route a public IP to my server at home.
This works nice but if I now access idefix.fechner.net it will always go
outside to the internet and then back through the tunnel to my local
server which is a real performance problem, as the internet connection
here is really slow.
The complete domain is dnssec signed using the following configuration:
zone "fechner.net" {
type master;
file "../master/fechner.net/fechner.net";
dnssec-policy "one-year-zsk";
inline-signing yes;
};
Now I want to make sure if I access idefix.fechner.net that it does not
use the tunnel but access it directly using the local address.
So the idea was to configure my named running at home to resolve some
host names differently.
What is here recommended best practice doing it?
Just added a new domain fechner.net and overwrite some A records? I
think that will break dnssec or?
Thanks for any pointer into the right direction.
Gruß
Matthias
--
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying to
produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning." --
Rich Cook
--
Visithttps://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from
this list
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us athttps://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Gruß
Matthias
--
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying to
produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning." --
Rich Cook
--
Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from
this list
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
