Hi, it has been a while -- are there any remaining issues with the patch? Regards, Jonas On 08/31/2015 06:37 PM, Michael Tremer wrote: > Hi Jonas, > > thank you for taking the time. This patch looks good to me. > > Acked-By: Michael Tremer > > On Mon, 2015-08-31 at 18:11 +0200, Jonas wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> sorry for the delay. The desec.io DDNS provider >> class is now implemented analog to >> >> http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h=6a >> c5 >> 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805 >> >> for simultaneous IPv4/v6 updates as suggested by Michael. >> >> Registering IPv4 and IPv6 addresses with the update.dedyn.io >> server was successfully tested. Explicit unregistering will >> still require updates on the server side. > Most of the providers don't implement that and that is okay. > >> Find attached the patches for src/ddns/providers.py >> and ddns.conf.sample > Stefan, would you please merge these patches after giving them good > testing? > > @Jonas: If you want to promote out little ddns client, it will run on > other systems as well, not just IPFire. Maybe it needs some slight > modification on the one or the other distribution, but I think it is de > finitely worth being more widely used. > > Best, > -Michael > >> >> -Jonas >> >> >> On 07/31/2015 12:09 PM, Michael Tremer wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 01:51 +0200, Jonas wrote: >>>> Hello Michael, >>>> >>>> >>>> in case of both IPv4 and IPv6 connection, the >>>> query string in the update URL may contain >>>> both a "myip" and a "myipv6" key simultaneously. >>>> (for single protocol updates, "myip" may be used >>>> for either protocol) >>> That is actually a good idea to do, but that is not included in the >>> reference documentation of the DynDNS protocol. >>> >>> We have implemented this for an other provider so you can simply >>> copy >>> those two lines and you are done: >>> >>> http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h= >>> 6ac5 >>> 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l805 >>> >>>> As far as i understand the ddns sources, simultaneous >>>> updates are not possible. >>> They are. Just like the example above or this: >>> >>> http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ddns.git;a=blob;f=src/ddns/providers.py;h= >>> 6ac5 >>> 56444553fbf0d6e8b23854fe228ad6c81fc5;hb=HEAD#l1085 >>> >>> Most providers just require sending two requests which is not the >>> most >>> preferable option, but what can you do?! >>> >>>> This may be resolved on the server side in the future. >>> What is probably quite important is to properly clear any IPv4 or >>> IPv6 >>> addresses when a system does not have connectivity to either one >>> any >>> more. >>> >>>> A possible workaround could be to always include >>>> both addresses in the update URL, independent of >>>> the "protocol" argument of the update method. >>> Will you send me an updated patch then? >>> >>> -Michael >>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> Jonas >>>> >>>> On 07/30/2015 01:00 PM, Michael Tremer wrote: >>>>> Hello Jonas, >>>>> >>>>> thank you very much for sending in this patch. It looks really >>>>> good. >>>>> >>>>> I was just wondering if it wouldn't be better to implement IPv6 >>>>> support >>>>> properly. As far as I understand it, ddns will send two updates >>>>> and >>>>> the >>>>> second one will delete the updated data from the first one. In >>>>> case >>>>> of >>>>> a system having connectivity to the IPv6 and IPv4 Internet, the >>>>> DNS >>>>> record will just point to the IPv4 address. Correct me if I am >>>>> wrong >>>>> here. Now it only works if a system has either IPv6 or IPv4 >>>>> connectivity. >>>>> >>>>> Let me know if we can solve this problem. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> -Michael >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 20:13 +0200, Jonas wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> i'd like to add support for the desec.io >>>>>> dyndns service. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is DynDNS 2 compatible, so the patch is small. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Jonas