New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Blocking ISSUES & Two Requests #7
Comments
Which beta/alpha version are you using? Not having this problem on Linux. |
Could you open one ticket per issue? That would be way easier to track.
|
Do you have a DNS cache between your clients and dnscrypt-proxy? Something like Unbound or dnsmasq? What shows up as empty are queries for the root zone ("."). There's no domain name. Your caching resolver is trying to bubble up the DNS hierarchy to validate DNSSEC signatures, starting from the root. |
Can you clarify what is wrong?
This is a Unix timestamp. LTSV structured files are designed to be parsed by scripts, or by log processing applications. |
Log management... after 2.0.0 is released. |
I added a So you can log only |
Very strange behaviour compared to the DNSCrypt v1.9.5 (same blocking list)
Legend:
tsg format:
ltsv format:
• All the same, only my first rule works, nothing more
• Missed any info about domain names
• What wrong with time in the ltsv format?
DNSKEY
outputs in the "DNS.log". For Example:tsg format:
ltsv format:
• What are
DNSKEY
enties? Never seen them before...• What's wrong with
time:
in the ltsv format?DNS.log
?Logs for "example2.com" will not be present in the DNS.log , but in the "Restricted.log" only.
(Per 100+ same unstoppable entries in "DNS.log" at once, so many garbage, hard to troubleshoot other entries, heavy Log-files, my eyes can't searching quickly and effectivly to shoot the new suspicious links)
About "example2.com" : I'm sure and I'm remember, that this domain will be blocked, and I don't wanna see his multiple entries in my "DNS.log" at all (Leave it in the "Restricted.log" only).
M-m-m... Hope, you understand, what I mean... My liveable English is in my future forever :(
Would implementing this feature with "GO" programming will look a bit easier?
Just asking... No pressure :)
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: