Debian: add KadNode to resolv.conf

[stokito]

The openwrt package register redirect of the .p2p domains to a local kadnode dns resolver. But for Debian and Arch only the NSS reolver is added.
Should we add the preinst script that will add the same redirect to the resolv.conf?

[mwarning]

The problem is that the TLD that is intercepted is configurable. So when it is set for the kadnode binary, it would also need to be changed in the /etc/resolv.conf. On OpenWrt I had no other choice because there is no /etc/nsswitch.conf.

[stokito]

We may add the same p2p TLD by default. Any advanced users may set up own domain if needed.

[mwarning]

Sure, we can use /etc/resolv.conf on Debian instead of /etc/nsswitch.conf if it is possible.

[stokito]

I found that Consul redirects DNS for own tld:
https://developer.hashicorp.com/consul/docs/services/discovery/dns-forwarding/enable#systemd-resolved

So create /etc/systemd/resolved.conf.d/kadnode.conf

[Resolve]
DNS=127.0.0.1:3535
DNSSEC=false
Domains=~p2p

then

systemctl restart systemd-resolved

add to /etc/kadnode/kadnode.conf the option --dns-port 3535 and systemctl restart kadnode.

I think we should do this by default.

[mwarning]

Hi, that is what we do on OpenWrt already. If it works, then I would definitely prefer this.
Do you like to create an MR?

[stokito]

I may send a PR later.
BTW the Consul article shows that we may add a file into /etc/dnsmasq.d/ so we probably may get rid off the postinst script.

[mwarning]

hm, dnsmasq does not seem to use /etc/dnsmasq.d by default in OpenWrt

[stokito]

yes, the ps ax | grep dnsmasq shows /usr/sbin/dnsmasq -C /var/etc/dnsmasq.conf.cfg01411c so it uses the generated config. The generated config inside has only one conf-dir=/tmp/dnsmasq.d. I don't know why the OpenWrt doesn't look for the the standard folder.

The postinst has:

uci add_list dhcp.@dnsmasq[0].server='/p2p/::1#3535'

The wiki page says:

If it does not work it may mean that KadNode tries to connect to the IPv4 localhost address. Change ::1 by 127.0.0.1 in this case.

Maybe use the IPv4 here? like /p2p/127.0.0.2#3535. If someone built OpenWrt without the IPv6 support then it won't have a trouble.

[mwarning]

I agree that 127.0.0.1 is the slightly better choice.