Feedback for "Allow defining clients by their MAC address, host name and networking interface"

Yeah, I don't have any Apple devices myself, I'm Linux-only - good for the money :wink: Joke aside, I've seen users mentioning that there was a recent Apple change concerning randomizing MAC addresses (which will likely randomize IPv6 addresses as well?). Maybe this affects you. Please open a new ticket for it and/or use the search on this forum to find more details.

Selectable feature in IOS 14, currently in beta.

Due to the merge into development, the branch new/mac_clients picked up the new/tre-regex changes as well now. So if you update your new/mac_clients branch, you can already test both changes in combination (plus also the ECS (EDNS Client Subnet) identification if you can use that). I had to fix quite a number of merge conflicts, however, our automated test suite suggests that everything works well.

I second this. As I know you by now, you probably have already done it :slight_smile:

does i work whit 5.2?

No, these are all experimental changes. None of these two features are in the released version. However, these features appear to be stable so testing them is possible without causing harm (probably).

Well, actually, yes. I implemented a first attempt at what I described above already yesterday, however, I haven't really had any time for testing. I did the testing now and everything seems to work as expected. I will document this and we should discuss this in a new topic:

Another (bigger*) update to this branch is parsing of the kernel's Internet protocol address management. Local interfaces are not included in the ARP/neigh cache and, hence, they were recorded as individual mock devices without being able to stitch them together. This is now resolved.

Before (individual mock-devices without a connection to each other):

Screenshot at 2020-08-19 23-08-37

Screenshot at 2020-08-19 23-08-52

Now (they are grouped to the same device):

Screenshot at 2020-08-19 23-47-17

This will also work for any other local interface on the Pi-hole, e.g.,
Screenshot at 2020-08-19 23-47-27


*) 1 file changed, 383 insertions(+), 183 deletions(-)

1 Like
[✓] Detected ARM-aarch64 architecture
  [i] Checking for existing FTL binary...
  [i] Checksums do not match, downloading from ftl.pi-hole.net.
  [i] Downloading and Installing FTL...pihole-FTL-aarch64-linux-gnu: FAILED
sha1sum: WARNING: 1 computed checksum did NOT match
  [✗] Downloading and Installing FTL
  Error: Download of https://ftl.pi-hole.net/new/mac_clients/pihole-FTL-aarch64-linux-gnu failed (checksum error)
  [✗] FTL Engine not installed

  Unable to complete update, please contact Pi-hole Support

With the latest run of the CI, checksums are correct and updated works.

2 Likes

There is no need to keep identical hostnames in the table for IPv4 and IPV6

Each address has its own host name attached to it. So this is not really a duplicate. Actually, in my case (Ubuntu server), it looks like this:

OK, keep it as it is.

Very generous :slight_smile:

Thanks @DL6ER for merging into development, great work!
I've checked out development, most of it seems to work.
Now Network Table shows "unknown" for every device. I've flushed table but also after one hour no hostname are shown.

Edit: Thanks @yubiuser for your input in the next post, that was my problem. I thought ftl and web are merged, so I switched to development. But web isnt merged yet. That's it! Wait for web to get merged also.

I've literally tried three different wording, but it seems have not found the optimal phrase :sweat_smile:


After the ftl branch is merged into development, the web branch might be also ready for merging?

Oh yes, very likely. @DL6ER @promofaux

I cannot review my own PR. That's the entire idea behind enforcing reviews.

Done, thanks!

So it is clear, does this mean it is time to switch off this branch and over to dev?

Additional question:
I have IPv4 and IPv6 in my network. So most of the clients have an IPv4, IPv6 ULA (in my case fd28:: ) and IPv6 GLA address.
DHCP IPv4 does pihole, IPv6 my Fritz!Box. Name resolution for IPv4 is working, in Network Table Clients are correctly shown (for example a smartphone with all three addresses). In Dashboard and log IPv6 are not resolved (shown as fd28:: )
As far as I understand the option NAMES_FROM_NETDB therefore it would shown the name from the network table. Is this correct?

Thanks in advance!
@DL6ER