Support DNS Made Easy via DNS-O-Matic


#1

Hi folks,

We are using a range of balances at remote sites with dynamic IP across multiple bonded WANS.

We use DNS made easy for our DNS provider. We wish to use DNS-O-Matic via our balances to update our DNS Made Easy accounts, however since late v5 (possibly 5.4.) and all v6 firmware a check Is enforced to provide valid FQDN hostnames to update on the DNS O Matic options. DNS Made Easy uses an 8 digit ID code not a hostname and so current firmware balances wil not work due to requiring a valid FQDN.

In order to support DNS Made Easy via DNS O MATIC, this enforcement check needs to be relaxed again as per the older firmwares. You may look at Ticket #742592 which I was working through with support.

Thanks

James


#2

Anyone from Peplink reading these?

Thanks

James


#3

Hi James, thanks for your feature request. We will look into this and let you know.


#4

Thanks Tim!

Much obliged. We’re a bit stuck for our DNS needs currently.

Cheers

James


#5

Hi there!

Sorry to be a bit pushy but is there any update on the feasability of this please. We are desperate to be able to use this feature.

Thanks

James


#6

6.1.2 firmware is out but has not addressed this issue. Can someone from Peplink please give me a clue here as currently with this bug and certain SNMP OIDs removed from the V6 firmware there’s no way currently for querying a remote balance interface IP addresses.

Can I expect this issue to be considered ever? and actually fixed?


#7

For now I recommend to create a PepVPN connection between all these sites. Firmware 6.1.2 also supports Pepmin via InControl2, allowing you to access the web gui of remote devices even if they are behind dynamic or NAT’d IP’s.

Does this address your issue?


#8

Thanks Tim, we already run speedfusions. The problem comes up when sites drop their connections and their dynamic ips change and for whatever reason dont come back up and rejoin the speedfusion.

We are aware of incontrol but its very expensive relative to using SNMP or a dynamic DNS service.

James


#9

Hi James, those remote sites should always have a healthy SpeedFusion tunnel as long as there is at least one healthy WAN connected. If a single connection drops and obtains a new IP it should automatically rejoin the SpeedFusion tunnel. Remember, only the HQ site needs to have a static IP to create the tunnel. The HQ site does not need to know anything about the remote sites, other than the ID.

Could you just migrate over to a different DDNS provider?


#10

Hi Tim,

The speedfusions work pretty well but occasionally we get a site go off and just won’t reconnect. - The hub balances are on fixed IPs so the remote sites always connect to the hubs. So we just want to be able to look up the site IP as the remote balance is usually up and just reboot it.

Also had an instance the other day with a site where one of our engineers was testing two lines going to a remote site. He disonnected one, then made the schoolboy error and disconnected the other so we had to phone the remote site and get a very timid user to give us a remote control session in to a local machine to get it going again.

There are just loads of reasons why we need the remote end IP addresses and the point is that the V5.4 firmware used to work just fine with our dns provider. All it needs is a simple modification to the firmware again so it does not expect a hostname, we should not have to change providers and jump through hoops because a feature has been broken.

As mentioned as well I have an open ticket (#743505) because peplink have removed the standard IP-MIB from the V6.1 firmware so we can’t get interface IPs via snmp standard methods. I was told to use the peplink specific MIB but that doesn’t give IP addresses either. I have chased this ticked but have received no response in 10 days about it now. We’ve invested heavily in the balance products and like them very much on the whole, but can’t understand why such a simple and arguably essential function is unavailable when almost anything else that supports SNMP will.

At the end of the day we don’t care how we get the remote end interface IPs, be it dynamic dns, snmp or something else but nothing works currently and that just isn’t acceptable as everything else on our networks I can get a remote IP address for.

Regards

James