dnsmasq and ipv6 config

[Monviech (Cedrik)]

You just have to read the manual it explains everything. If you still have questions afterwards or something does not work I'll try to help.

[muchacha_grande]

Ok, I've read the manual. I'm going to install the proxy and configure it.

I'll report the results for the record.

Thanks.

EDIT: it will take more time than expected at first. I have various services exposed on Internet using the router address and NAT66. Have to reconfigure everything :-(

[muchacha_grande]

Finally I went with changing the local IPv6 addresses to an ULA range maintaining NAT66.

I didn't implement ndp-proxy-go yet because as soon as I started to plan the migration I realized that the amount of work to be done was too much.

My main goal was to migrate from ISC to Dnsmasq and now it's working fine with DHCPv4 and DHCPv6, RA and static entries are being assigned.

In a future instance I will implement ndp-proxy-go.

The only caveat is that static configured addresses are not resolved by Dnsmasq. So I had to add them manually in Unbound overrides.
If the device is configured to get the IP via DHCP the name resolution work with both dynamic and reserved addresses, but if the IP is fixed on the device and it doesn't get it from DHCP, the name resolution doesn't work.
With ISC-DHCP, the name resolution worked both in the cases of static IPs configured on the devices and in IPs assigned via DHCP.

[OPNenthu]

The only caveat is that static configured addresses are not resolved by Dnsmasq. So I had to add them manually in Unbound overrides.
If the device is configured to get the IP via DHCP the name resolution work with both dynamic and reserved addresses, but if the IP is fixed on the device and it doesn't get it from DHCP, the name resolution doesn't work.
With ISC-DHCP, the name resolution worked both in the cases of static IPs configured on the devices and in IPs assigned via DHCP.

I'm not sure which approach is better (appreciate advice from others), but I have been adding Host entries in Dnsmasq even for statically configured ones.  They don't show up in Leases, but they do get added to DNS and I presume also marks that IP as reserved from the pool.

I make sure all the static IPs I use fall within the Dnsmasq range, which is a difference from ISC.  This can obviously leave unused IPs if your Dnsmasq pool is, for example, .100 to .254.  Then the entire range .2 to .99 is wasted.

I can think of a couple solutions:

1) Define the Dnsmasq range as .2 to .254 (.1 being for the gateway in this example)
2) Define two ranges:  192.168.1.2 - 192.168.1.99 (static pool) and 192.168.1.100 - 192.168.1.254 (DHCP pool) for the same domain

Question for @Monviech/@Maurice or others - is #2 viable and a good idea?  I haven't tested.

[muchacha_grande]

They don't show up in Leases, but they do get added to DNS and I presume also marks that IP as reserved from the pool.

This is what I couldn't make work. When the IPs are fixed they don't respond to DNS queries.

Will redefine my DHCP ranges better.