Comparison of DHCP service options

[nero355]

Other options are problematic because of type, e.g. the Unifi option (43).

It should be specified as a hex string with colons, but if you accidentally use quotes around that, it will get interpreted as string and fail to work. Thus, it was better if the specific Unifi option was present in the GUI with an IP and the real configuration was then adapted to prevent such user errors.

Even tho it's a bit weird to say "Hi! We are OPNsense and we now support UniFi products!" ^_^ it would still be very cool to perhaps consider supporting well known DHCP Options that are used by some vendors like CISCO/HPE/Ubiquiti/TP-Link/etc. if the OPNsense Developer Team feels like adding such a feature ?!

Decided to try dnsmasq it's surprising to read it's a one man army from the UK.

Still using unbound for dns.

If you want "DNSmasq on steroids" you could consider running Pi-Hole and using it's FTLDNS which is based on whatever is the latest DNSmasq code + extra code added by the Pi-Hole Developer Team :)

Combined with running your own Unbound instance to query DNS Root Servers as seen here : https://docs.pi-hole.net/guides/dns/unbound/
It's the best DNS solution I have ever had running on my LAN for about 10 years or so by now!

[DEC670airp414user]

I do not see a reason to move away from Kea.

I am experimenting

I just want the most reliable

We shall see I guess

I had almost no issues with Kea. What I found issues with I could work around

[meyergru]

@nero355: The DHCP option is just one (inferior) way of telling Unifi devices where their controller lives.

The other is to use an unqualified DNS entry "unifi", which can either be a CNAME or an A/AAAA record. The latter is better anyways, because the DHCP variant can only point to an IP address, which would neither work for a dynamic DNS server nor one that uses IPv6.

Thus, the corresponding feature request was futile.