shadowsocks / shadowsocks/shadowsocks-rust
Can local-dns be bound on the local-tun interface address?
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 10.9k
- Forks
- 1.5k
- Avg merge
- 4d 15h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 5
Description
Can local-dns be bound on the local-tun interface address?
I've tried:
{
"protocol": "tun",
"tun_interface_address": "10.255.0.1/24",
},
{
"protocol": "dns",
"local_address": "10.255.0.1",
"local_port": 53,
"local_dns_address": "114.114.114.114",
"local_dns_port": 53,
"remote_dns_address": "1.1.1.1",
"remote_dns_port": 53,
"client_cache_size": 1024,
"mode": "udp_only",
}
But it does not seem to respond to DNS requests. Is there any other way to transparently handle DNS requests according to whether it is "local" or "remote"?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reproducing the issue with the provided tun and dns configuration, focusing on requests sent to 10.255.0.1:53. Trace how local-tun addresses and local-dns bindings are handled, then determine whether binding is supported and document or test the transparent local-versus-remote DNS behavior that is possible.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- networking
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100