Hi Tomas,
I can do you one better.
ACL per interface is going to be included in the next feature version of
Unbound (somewhere in September).
I would probably have a PR ready this week which will be ready to be
merged on master.
I will update here when the PR is ready.
Best regards,
-- George
On 29/08/2022 10:33, Tomas S. wrote:
Hi George,
is there any chance You could help merge acl_interface
branch to 1.16.2?
util/configparser.c, util/configlexer.c and daemon/daemon.c
fails to patch.
On 2022-07-05 19:21, George Thessalonikefs via Unbound-users wrote:
Hi Tomas,
There is ongoing work that we call acl per interface.
This applies all the same logic of the access-control directives but
for the listening interface(s) instead.
It is being worked on a separate branch:
https://github.com/NLnetLabs/unbound/tree/acl_interface
This will be part of the next Unbound *feature* release (circa
September).
It should be ready, pending review near the release date.
If you want to already test I can provide some quick documentation:
- each access-control-* option you could previously use per client-ip
you can now do the same per listening interface with interface-*.
Note: The "access-control:" directive is named "interface-action:"
- if you mix and match access-control* options and the new interface-*
options, the access-control* options always overrule the interface-*
options as they are considered more specific (targeting clients
instead of the whole interface).
- The interfaces used in the interface-* options must have been already
defined with the interface: directive.
The unbound.conf man page and the example.conf file should provide
most of the information you would need.
Let me know if it works for you.
Best regards,
-- George
On 04/07/2022 10:53, Tomas S. via Unbound-users wrote:
Hello,
we are implementing recursive DNS service with a multiple RPZ zones,
where user can decide which policies to use by selecting one of
multiple DNS servers IPs
(think cloudflare 1.1.1.1 - default, 1.1.1.2 - with malware blocking,
1.1.1.3 - malware+adult blocking).
To implement this (in one server) one could run multiple unbound
instances,
but rpz: unbound configuration already supports tags, however, tags
can only be set
by client source IP.
I'm thinking about adding one more access-control directive: like
access-control-tag,
but for destination IP (lets say access-control-dest-tag).
Do you think it would be a reasonable approach?
Best Regards,
Tomas
