You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is useful in environments when a specific port is occupied. like we can use two services in same port 443 or etc... allow proxying unmatched requests to an external fallback service (similar to Nginx reverse proxy).
This feature would be especially useful when AdGuardHome is placed behind a reverse proxy or used in multi-purpose edge setups in countries where GFW present.
Also I knew that Fallback can't use UDP so it's not supported QUIC however for DOH it's should be fine since DOT occupied port 853.
Please consider adding this to the roadmap if feasible. I’d be happy to help with testing or clarifying the use case further.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hello AdGuardHome Team,
First of all, thank you for the great work on AdGuardHome — it's an excellent tool for DNS-level protection and filtering.
I'd like to request a feature that enables AdGuardHome to act similarly to Nginx when it comes to handling unmatched or fallback requests.
In Nginx, we can define fallback behavior using blocks like:
This is useful in environments when a specific port is occupied. like we can use two services in same port 443 or etc... allow proxying unmatched requests to an external fallback service (similar to Nginx reverse proxy).
This feature would be especially useful when AdGuardHome is placed behind a reverse proxy or used in multi-purpose edge setups in countries where GFW present.
Also I knew that Fallback can't use UDP so it's not supported QUIC however for DOH it's should be fine since DOT occupied port 853.
Please consider adding this to the roadmap if feasible. I’d be happy to help with testing or clarifying the use case further.
Thanks again!
Best regards.
Saeid
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions