We have not even finished the step of integrating
dnsmasq into the core of the project. However, it is now mostly done and we are slowly approaching the final release of Pi-hole v4.0. So, I’d say “Yes for the short- and mid-term evolution”. I cannot speak for what might be driving Pi-hole in five or ten years time. It may be that we decide to switch to another resolver. However,
dnsmasq is very convenient at the moment mostly due to three reasons (there might be more I’m just not thinking about right now):
- We used to use
dnsmasqsince a long time. All users that liked to customize their setups are well familiar with the config syntax and how to do things.
- We have several developers who are familiar with the source code of
dnsmasqbut none who are (very) familiar with the source code of
dnsmasqgives us just what we want (integrated DHCP server, etc.) If we would switch to, let’s say
unbound, then we would not only have to recode everything of
FTL, but we would also have to look at sticking together different projects into one for being able to offer both DHCP and DNS services.
In this light, I’d say it is safe to say that
dnsmasq is the optimal choice for now and at least a few years (when we might re-evaluate things). It “just works” and as a very flexible DNS forwarder it can easily be set up in combination with, e.g., a resolving server like
unbound (I have such a setup at home and described it in a very easy wiki article) and benefit from all advantages such a resolver has.