Yes; with router DNS set to pi, no other devices have trouble making their way to the net; or pinging the router w/ "proper" results.
FURTHER
pi pings the router just fine when the router dns is 8.8.8.8; but has the weird ping-path when DNS is set to pi IP.
.
If it helps at all; i ran debug again, then when it asked to upload; i switched the DNS back to 8.8.8.8. and that allowed the log to upload. Token: nwzksewqmt
Also - pi.ip/admin will not open any longer. i think that happened after a uninstall/reinstall of pihole; but the no internet access issue is the same.
Alight- I did these things. new sdcard, jessie lite, etc.
8. pi connection OK after install
9. manually setting DNS to PI on win10 pc -> ads are still coming through, even though the /admin page shows a lot of blocks. What URLs are good to test with - maybe the ads i'm seeing are just not on the block list? This makes me think the router is not the issue; but within a few days i may test all this setup with a belkin router to be sure.
.
Also
The same issue persists - as soon as I change the router DNS to PI... pi loses WAN connection.
OK, so that means the problem is with your router settings. Since you can effectively use the Pi-hole when manually setting your DNS servers, this proves Pi-hole is functioning.
So the win10 PC doesn't care if the DNS is set by the router OR manually; pi-hole seems to work just fine both ways.
.
So the problem is the way pi / pi-hole / router are talking.
.
I have been thinking about swapping the d-link firmware for dd-wrt. Maybe I'll go through with it and see if pihole and dd-wrt play nicer with each other.
.
So what do we say on this thread - that the d-link 868L firmware is not compatible w/ pi-hole? I REALLY want to use the router to set DNS; it's too much labor to be setting DNS for each phones/pc's/laptops/etc.
.
Thanks for your support Jacob; it's a neat code you've made.
It's difficult for us to test if no one on the team has the same router...we're still small, so some of the support will end up on the user. We just try our best to help and guide you in the right direction.
I think you should try another router if you can and if it works, then yes, I'd say your current router is causing the problem.
Nice find; thanks for sharing.
It does seem it's a router issue - but it's a router SOFTWARE issue right? Maybe I can swap the firmware to DD-WRT and take of the problem? I'm assuming lots of people run DD-WRT along w/ pi-hole?
.
Also - is there a common URL to visit to test if the pi-hole is blocking ads?
Good news
I confirmed that my old Belkin N150 router allows the DNS setting NO PROBLEM; so it seems pretty clear that the issues is the dLINK firmware. What a pain. I saw a solution in the forum that using the pi as DHCP worked in conjuction with setting up dnsmasq... but i'd rather let my router be the router as I plan to use the pi for lots of odd projects.
BAD news
My solution: Try putting DD-WRT or Tomato on the dLINK to fix the firmware issue! Look, "lots" of people have tried these open sources on this 868L, so no problem right? WRONG. It's bricked. I had a chance of recovery and blew it; $60 down the drain. At least the old router works fine.....
I know this issue is over, but in case anyone else comes to this thread. It was likely an improper setup.
The router's WAN DNS servers should not be change, leave them coming from your ISP using DHCP. Only the DNS servers that is used by the LAN DHCP server in the router should be changed to the pi-hole DNS.
Computers on the network will get the IP for the pi-hole provided to them, send their DNS queries to the pi-hole, and then the pi-hole will forward on to OpenDNS or Google DNS. The router will only ever use its WAN DNS for its own lookups (ie, NTP, checking for updates from ISP, etc.).
A router typically cannot access a private IP on its public WAN interface. The change should have been in the DHCP DNS configuration, NOT in WAN DNS configuration. So its not that the router is not working correctly, its that its MISSING A FEATURE to manually specify the LAN DNS servers. I would have guessed this isn't the case, a basic router provided these features for decades, but I just looked at my D-Link DIR-655 and it did NOT have the option to specify DNS servers for its DHCP server.
Usually there are three options:
What the WAN DNS servers are, also give to DHCP clients.
Use DNS relay, which means DHCP clients are told the DNS server is the router LAN IP, but then just forwards it to the 2-3 DNS servers it received on its WAN. (This is default or most typical)
Manually specify 1-2 DNS servers to be provided to DHCP clients (this is the missing feature in the DLink router)
So bottomline, the router is junk. The work around would be simply to use static DNS on each computer set to the pi-hole, and then the router wouldn't need to be changed at all.
I think this issue shows that it would be best to offer DHCP server option from dnsmasq so that the router doesn't need to be changed, other than disabling its own DHCP server.
I was about to be frustrated - b/c you said it was an improper setup - and I know my setup was fine; and I had it working with another router; but not the D-LINK. But then you go on to explain it well.
So its not that the router is not working correctly, its that its
MISSING A FEATURE to manually specify the LAN DNS servers. I would have
guessed this isn't the case, a basic router provided these features for
decades, but I just looked at my D-Link DIR-655 and it did NOT have the option to specify DNS servers for its DHCP server.
So it wasn't the setup, it was the router. Had I not bricked the D-link getting DD-WRT installed, it probably would have been fine. But I'm running a Cisco EA6500 w/ DD-WRT now and there are no issues, the setup was straight forward. I also really WANT to use my router as the DHCP server so I can keep all my network settings on 1 device, and the settings are familiar and available w/ a GUI which I appreciate being only a very part time computer nerd.
No disrespect intended, just intended to say it was the wrong part of router configuration that was being changed, and then a long way of saying the router lacked the right configuration option.
The physical connections and intended use were correct. Given the router is 'incompatible', hah, I think "improper setup" might actually be ok wording.
Sure sure. What's kinda funny and also gave me an attitude check is I just checked my DD-WRT setup and I am using the PI for both the "local DNS" (=router WAN DNS?) and for the DHCP clients; so that is "improper" but it's also working just fine by dumb luck.
