ddns patches for desec.io provider support
Message ID | 55B917C8.4080708@desec.io |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Headers |
Return-Path: <ddns-bounces@lists.ipfire.org> Received: from mail01.ipfire.org (mail01.tremer.info [172.28.1.200]) by septima.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7B2461FDD for <patchwork@ipfire.org>; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:13:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hedwig.ipfire.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail01.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A30302176 for <patchwork@ipfire.org>; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:13:32 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2a01:4f8:101:31e2:a5a2:1:0:2; helo=mail.a4a.de; envelope-from=jonas@desec.io; receiver=ddns@lists.ipfire.org Received: from mail.a4a.de (mail.a4a.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:101:31e2:a5a2:1:0:2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail01.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD1DB144; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:13:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=[192.168.178.46]) by mail.a4a.de with esmtpa (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <jonas@desec.io>) id 1ZKVr7-0006Pb-3I; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:13:29 +0200 Message-ID: <55B917C8.4080708@desec.io> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:13:28 +0200 From: Jonas <jonas@desec.io> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: michael.tremer@ipfire.org, stefan.schantl@ipfire.org Subject: ddns patches for desec.io provider support Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------020400060203050701060604" X-BeenThere: ddns@lists.ipfire.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List for the IPFire dynamic DNS client <ddns.lists.ipfire.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ipfire.org/mailman/options/ddns>, <mailto:ddns-request@lists.ipfire.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.ipfire.org/pipermail/ddns/> List-Post: <mailto:ddns@lists.ipfire.org> List-Help: <mailto:ddns-request@lists.ipfire.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ipfire.org/mailman/listinfo/ddns>, <mailto:ddns-request@lists.ipfire.org?subject=subscribe> Cc: ddns@lists.ipfire.org Errors-To: ddns-bounces@lists.ipfire.org Sender: "ddns" <ddns-bounces@lists.ipfire.org> |
Message
Jonas
July 30, 2015, 4:13 a.m. UTC
Hi, i'd like to add support for the desec.io dyndns service. It is DynDNS 2 compatible, so the patch is small. Regards, Jonas
Comments
Hello Jonas, thank you very much for sending in this patch. It looks really good. I was just wondering if it wouldn't be better to implement IPv6 support properly. As far as I understand it, ddns will send two updates and the second one will delete the updated data from the first one. In case of a system having connectivity to the IPv6 and IPv4 Internet, the DNS record will just point to the IPv4 address. Correct me if I am wrong here. Now it only works if a system has either IPv6 or IPv4 connectivity. Let me know if we can solve this problem. Best, -Michael On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 20:13 +0200, Jonas wrote: > Hi, > > > i'd like to add support for the desec.io > dyndns service. > > It is DynDNS 2 compatible, so the patch is small. > > > > Regards, > Jonas
Hello Michael, in case of both IPv4 and IPv6 connection, the query string in the update URL may contain both a "myip" and a "myipv6" key simultaneously. (for single protocol updates, "myip" may be used for either protocol) As far as i understand the ddns sources, simultaneous updates are not possible. This may be resolved on the server side in the future. A possible workaround could be to always include both addresses in the update URL, independent of the "protocol" argument of the update method. Kind regards, Jonas On 07/30/2015 01:00 PM, Michael Tremer wrote: > Hello Jonas, > > thank you very much for sending in this patch. It looks really good. > > I was just wondering if it wouldn't be better to implement IPv6 support > properly. As far as I understand it, ddns will send two updates and the > second one will delete the updated data from the first one. In case of > a system having connectivity to the IPv6 and IPv4 Internet, the DNS > record will just point to the IPv4 address. Correct me if I am wrong > here. Now it only works if a system has either IPv6 or IPv4 > connectivity. > > Let me know if we can solve this problem. > > Best, > -Michael > > > On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 20:13 +0200, Jonas wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> i'd like to add support for the desec.io >> dyndns service. >> >> It is DynDNS 2 compatible, so the patch is small. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> Jonas
Hi, On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 01:51 +0200, Jonas wrote: > Hello Michael, > > > in case of both IPv4 and IPv6 connection, the > query string in the update URL may contain > both a "myip" and a "myipv6" key simultaneously. > (for single protocol updates, "myip" may be used > for either protocol) That is actually a good idea to do, but that is not included in the reference documentation of the DynDNS protocol. We have implemented this for an other provider so you can simply copy those two lines and you are done: http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=6ac5 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805 > As far as i understand the ddns sources, simultaneous > updates are not possible. They are. Just like the example above or this: http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=6ac5 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l1085 Most providers just require sending two requests which is not the most preferable option, but what can you do?! > This may be resolved on the server side in the future. What is probably quite important is to properly clear any IPv4 or IPv6 addresses when a system does not have connectivity to either one any more. > > A possible workaround could be to always include > both addresses in the update URL, independent of > the "protocol" argument of the update method. Will you send me an updated patch then? -Michael > > Kind regards, > Jonas > > On 07/30/2015 01:00 PM, Michael Tremer wrote: > > Hello Jonas, > > > > thank you very much for sending in this patch. It looks really > > good. > > > > I was just wondering if it wouldn't be better to implement IPv6 > > support > > properly. As far as I understand it, ddns will send two updates and > > the > > second one will delete the updated data from the first one. In case > > of > > a system having connectivity to the IPv6 and IPv4 Internet, the DNS > > record will just point to the IPv4 address. Correct me if I am > > wrong > > here. Now it only works if a system has either IPv6 or IPv4 > > connectivity. > > > > Let me know if we can solve this problem. > > > > Best, > > -Michael > > > > > > On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 20:13 +0200, Jonas wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > i'd like to add support for the desec.io > > > dyndns service. > > > > > > It is DynDNS 2 compatible, so the patch is small. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Jonas >