dns: mention Unbound & ctrl.blog on Actually secure DNS over TLS in Unbound #1219
No reviewers
Labels
No Label
🔍🤖 Search Engines
approved
dependencies
duplicate
feedback wanted
high priority
I2P
iOS
low priority
OS
Self-contained networks
Social media
stale
streaming
todo
Tor
WIP
wontfix
XMPP
[m]
₿ cryptocurrency
ℹ️ help wanted
↔️ file sharing
⚙️ web extensions
✨ enhancement
❌ software removal
💬 discussion
🤖 Android
🐛 bug
💢 conflicting
📝 correction
🆘 critical
📧 email
🔒 file encryption
📁 file storage
🦊 Firefox
💻 hardware
🌐 hosting
🏠 housekeeping
🔐 password managers
🧰 productivity tools
🔎 research required
🌐 Social News Aggregators
🆕 software suggestion
👥 team chat
🔒 VPN
🌐 website issue
🚫 Windows
👁️ browsers
🖊️ digital notebooks
🗄️ DNS
🗨️ instant messaging (im)
🇦🇶 translations
No Milestone
No Assignees
1 Participants
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: privacyguides/privacytools.io#1219
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "unbound"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Description
Resolves: partially https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/1055
Check List
I have read and understand the contributing guidelines.
I have listed the source code.
This project is free/libre software.
This project has an associated discussion.
Netlify preview for the mainly edited page: https://deploy-preview-1219--privacytools-io.netlify.com/providers/dns/#icanndns
Code Repository (if applicable): https://github.com/NLnetLabs/unbound
I kind of feel dirty for pull requesting my own config file / project, even if it has been talked previously and had positive reception.
Deploy preview for privacytools-io ready!
Built with commit
d08283c1b6
https://deploy-preview-1219--privacytools-io.netlify.com
Small suggestions but LGTM
I’m not sure if stating the version numbers is really beneficial for users?
I think we could just break this into separate sentences:
In my opinion yes, because Ubuntu 18.04 LTS has Unbound 1.6.7-1ubuntu2.1 and Debian 9 (oldstable) has 1.6.0-3+deb9u2.
Ubuntu 18.04 is the latest LTS release, the next one will be 19.04 and I think a general rule of thumb for production systems is to not update to a new Debian until the first point release and Debian 10.1 is currently scheduled for 2019-09-07 as far as I am aware.
Debian 10 would have 1.9.0-2 which is higher than the minimum 1.7.3.
I don't want to hold Unbound back due to the two distribution versions having old versions and I don't want to add and have to manage warnings, so I think having the version number listed is the least worst solution and any advanced user setting it up should notice the version number mismatch while troubleshooting weird errors.
Also those two distributions have older version on dnscrypt-proxy, which is why I wrote https://mikaela.info/blog/english/2018/10/21/dnscrypt-proxy-quick-dirty-debian.html .
To complicate the matters with dnscrypt-proxy further (and sidetrack), as the v2 is written in Go and Debian hasn't yet figured out gomodules (AFAIK), Debian 11 (testing) is stuck with
2.0.19+ds1-2+b11
while the current version upstream is 2.0.25.Will do
Wow TIL! Thanks for explaining @Mikaela 👍 Yes, I agree, we should keep the version number then 😄
Would it make sense to have a direct copy in this repo then? It won't reflect easily changes you adapt though which could be useful for users.
I am not sure that would be a good idea either and it would duplicate the amount of work for me or possibly other users.
What would you say @JonahAragon ?
^^ Yeah, the maintainability of it + it getting stale would likely happen.
LGTM
Alternative link via Quad9: https://dnsprivacy.org/wiki/display/DP/DNS+Privacy+Clients#DNSPrivacyClients-Unbound
I prefer the ctrl.blog one though.
LG 👍🏼
The ctrl.blog one is definitely more robust; probably more preferred here.
@privacytoolsIO/editorial Could I have reviews here? I just fixed the merge conflict by merging master in.