frequent OMV local DNS requests

Background:
I'm running a Pi-Hole DNS server on my OMV machine within a virtual machine. Love it.
My desktop machine is running Archlinux.

Recently I'm seeing a high amount of DNS requests from OMV and it's only requesting the IP of my Arch machine, to the tune of 500-600 times every 10 minutes. Any idea what might be causing this and how I can fix it?

Thanks

plugins installed:
snapraid
union filesystem
omv extras
reset perms
virtualbox

Zitat von flmaxey

Obviously you couldn't stop the disk related plugin's. OMVextra's and reset perm's should be fine.

You might consider turning off Virtualbox.
Is there a VM guest, in VB, that connects to the Arch box in some way? (A media server, shares, etc.)

________________________

Things to look at might be:

In VB, are you using a "bridged adapter" for VM's? (I don't know if this would have any effect.)

Is your Arch box statically addressed or is it DHCP? AND, are you using Pi-Holes DHCP server?

I looked at the Linux equivalent of a Windows "Hosts" file. It's in \etc\hosts. Unfortunately, it's auto-generated in OMV so it can't be used to head this issue off.

If you're running PI-Hole, I'm assuming you have OMV statically addressed and set to a public DNS provider, like 8.8.8.8. Also, Pi-Hole should be using a public DNS server. (Not your ISP's DNS.)

When did this start? (A configuration change or a server add-on?)

Alles anzeigen

Thanks for the ideas.
The only VM running in virtualbox is pi-hole. So I can't really disable VB without taking my network offline.

The pi-hole VM is indeed using a bridged adapter, but has been from the beginning.

Pi-hole is acting as a DHCP server. The arch box has been statically assigned an IP. Pi-hole uses my isp's dns servers for lookup. Why must it use public dns?

This started in the last week or so. Can't say I've made any configuration changes to either my omv or arch machine. Just regular updates.

I did edit the hosts file on omv to add an entry for the arch machine and it seems to have put a stop to the DNS requests. But I suppose that change will not stick.

flmaxey,
I'm pretty sure I figured out what happened. My Arch machine is directly connected to the UPS and as such runs NUT-server. OMV is running NUT-monitor although not using the OMV NUT plugin because the plugin doesn't have that capability.

Anyway, for some reason that I haven't figured out yet, when I reboot the Arch box, NUT-server fails to start automatically. I have to manually start it. My kids were messing around with the machine and somehow managed to get it rebooted last week and I forgot to start the NUT server.

So, OMV was continually trying to connect to the NUT server but not finding it. The reason for the DNS requests was the upsmon.conf on OMV was setup using the Arch box hostname, not IP. Manually editing the hosts file stopped the DNS requests temporarily, but fixing the upsmon.conf should be a permanent fix.

Thus ends this mystery.

Thanks for the help.

PS. Does Pi-hole in docker work the same as a virtual machine? Can it be updated when new pi-hole updates come out?

Zitat

Good, because what you were describing didn't make sense. (Outside of a Linux virus which is exceedingly rare.) I would ask why you set up NUT on two different machines, in this manner, but I'll mind my own business....

Two machines powered from the same UPS. The one connected to the UPS is running NUT server, the other is running NUT monitor. Is there another way to do this?

Zitat

A Docker works the same as a VM, in many respects. After all, Dockers are a form of VM that shares the kernel and memory space with the host. Accordingly, Dockers are more efficient for resources, when compared to a full VM. "But" the update process is very different. Essentially, to update, you'd have to pull the "lastest" Docker image and run it. ("Latest" is a Docker tag.) This is reliant on the Docker author creating an updated image, when a new package comes out.
There's a utility (really a Docker) called Lighthouse that's supposed to update Docker images as they're published. Frankly, I'm to conservative to trust it. While Docker processes are maturing, there are a lot of variable between even reputable Docker image authors. So with Dockers and the way I like to do things, generally speaking, I'm a bit behind the cutting edge.

For pi-hole I'm using a dietpi VM which is a lightweight debian. It works very well. Easy to update too.

Zitat

Well, if I wasn't minding my own business (I was just kidding about that, BTW:.
Having two loads on an UPS is fine. But I don't see the reason behind connecting two PC's to it. The USB connection is for, primarily, monitoring the charge state of the battery and shutting down when the charge drops. It would seem that it would be best to have the server, up 24x7, handle that task. A workstation is usually up only when being used so, if there's a power outage, the user should simply shut it down.

Well essentially both machines run 24x7. It just worked better to have the UPS next to the workstation. I'll be moving soon and when I set up at the new house I would plan to put the UPS next to the server.
NUT will shutdown both machines if the UPS is on battery power for too long.

Zitat

Now "that" is damx good way to do pi-hole. (The easy to update part.) Given the that it's really lightweight, it probably rivals the Docker for resources. Where did you get the VM image or installer?

There's a VBox (or VMware or Native PC images) right on their website. Go to dietpi.com, click on download, select PC/VM.

They have a built-in system configuration and software install utility that makes it super easy to install pi-hole (or many other utilities).

Definitely check it out.