Setting up Samba4 internal DNS forwarder to try multiple DNS servers

Question

I have SQL Server and a simple table that will be populated automatically from time attendance machines:

[time_id],[time_resource_id],[time_type],[time_date],[time_hour],[time_establishment]
     1          123               in     2021-06-19     8:00          1
     2          123               out    2021-06-19     10:00
     3          123               in     2021-06-19     13:00

I would like to convert this to something like

time_resource_id,   time_date         t1 ,       t2     ,     t3
-------------------------------------------------------------------
123                2021-06-19         8:00      10:00       13:00

up to a max of t8.

How can I achieve this? I think something like pivot.

Thanks

Solution

Solution 1. get a cheap new router - it is higly unlikely your brand new $30 router won't have DNS forwarding function. Check the product specs before buying! It's also strange your new router does not have DNS function - did you check manuals and configuration interface thoroughly?

Solution 2. use google's public dns forwarder. it's quite ok (namebench tests claims google's distributed dns system is 266% faster than using my local bind9 caching-only service) unless you're concerned about privacy (about the fact that google might or might not collect your queries)

and at last, if the OP considers isc bind is too much overhead then maybe a light resolver like dnsmasq or unbound might come to help

Comments

[Dale K]

Please show what you tried and where you got stuck.

[Costin Gușă]

he does NOT want to run bind :) that's clearly stated in the question

[Frank Thomas]

he said he did not want to replace samba resolution with bind, which isn't necessary. I've updated my response to clarify that point. thanks!

[Costin Gușă]

if the OP considers isc bind is too much overhead then maybe a light resolver like dnsmasq or unbound might come to help.

[Arun]

Re: sol1, yeah, I'm surprised our ISP's standard router+modem combo (2701hg-g) doesn't support DNS forwarding. Re: sol2, That's an interesting page...8.8.8.8 sounds like a nice option, but what's with all the errors it reports?

[Arun]

Could you expand on "you will likely have to open a hole for forwarded queries to respond through"? Doesn't it work like every other outbound request?

[Arun]

Also it gets my primary DNS wrong and doesn't allow me to change it, so I'm not sure I trust the numbers...

[Frank Thomas]

UDP is hard for state-full filtering to deal with, because it is not connection-oriented as TCP is, and thus has no flags that let the NAT wall know that its part of an established connection starting from the inside. the state-full packet filter will try its best to make flows together based on the timing and source/destination addressing, but can't always make the determination that the server response is pursuant to a request made from inside. to make sure you get all your responses, you usually have to open a hole on UDP\53.

[Costin Gușă]

I don't see what errors are you referring to. if you talk about the namebench it's just a wrong header in that page and you have to scroll a little bit down to see the results.

[Arun]

Yes, the namebench--it's in the header but also in the results, numerous "incorrect" entries.

[Arun]

Went with Solution 1 here.