this pull request add new features which allow user to customize dns servers

config example : { "dns_mode": "ipv6_then_ipv4", "dns_servers": [{ "addr": "114.114.114.114", "port": 53, "protocol": "udp", "trust_nx_responses": true },{ "addr": "223.5.5.5", "port": 53, "protocol": "udp", "trust_nx_responses": true },{ "addr": "202.101.172.35", "port": 53, "protocol": "udp", "trust_nx_responses": true } ], "endpoints": [{ "listen": { "addr": "0.0.0.0:80", "net": "tcp" }, "remote": { "addr": "iot.fotile.com:80", "net": "tcp" } } ] }

If no dns server is specified, the default dns configuration is used

Midori is a tool I love and it's so stable that I want to use it for my own services.

Considering that my existing service is built on the docker platform, I need a midori docker image.

But I couldn't find any official or unofficial midori images on docker.com,

do you have any plans to release docker images in the future?

Hi,there

I've been using midori for a while now and I think it's a very useful tool and I really like it.

During use, I encountered a small problem, to be precise, a small question: after configuring the domain name in endpoints.remote.addr, will the DNS resolution result be cached, and how long is the default cache time? I ask this question because I want to access a service whose IP changes frequently but the domain name remains the same through a fixed address (my local IP and port)

Below is my config file content

{ "dns_mode": "ipv4_then_ipv6", "endpoints": [ { "listen": { "addr": "127.0.0.1:5000", "net": "tcp", "trans": { "proto": "ws", "path": "/ws" } }, "remote": { "addr": "ip.myserver.com:443", "net": "tcp", "trans": { "proto": "ws", "path": "/ws" }, "tls": { "roots": "firefox", "versions": "tlsv1.3", "sni": "api.myserver.com", "aplns": "http/1.1", "skip_verify": false, "enable_sni": true } } } ] }

In my scenario, the IP addresses corresponding to domain ‘api.myserver.com’ and domain ‘ip.myserver.com’ are always the same，and change frequently

Hi,

Love your work!

was testing your zero-copy supported forked of the realm, but it seems to have performance issues. Fortunately, midori has no issues with performance so far.

any plans on supporting port range forwarding?

Hi,

I wanna try midori in my host(Debian 10), and I create a config file as following:

{
  "dns_mode": "ipv4_only",
  "endpoints": [
      {
        "listen": {
          "addr": "0.0.0.0:30760"
        },
        "remote": {
          "addr": "us-test.example.com:12345",
          "trans": {
            "proto": "ws",
            "path": "/0c921660a10729a81048961df5b3a125"
          }
        }
      }
  ]
}

But when I run /midori -c config.json, I got a error:

PanicInfo { payload: Any { .. }, message: None, location: Location { file: "/cargo/registry/src/github.com-1ecc6299db9ec823/tokio-1.9.0/src/runtime/enter.rs", line: 39, col: 9 } }

If I change the remote's addr to IP such as x.x.x.x, I can run the command successfully.

{ "dns_mode": "ipv4_then_ipv6", "dns_servers": [{ "address": "1.1.1.1", "port": 53, "trust_nx_responses": true, "protocol": "udp", "tls_servername": "127.0.0.1" } ], "endpoints": [{ "listen": { "addr": "10.2.4.3:52443", "net": "tcp", "trans": { "proto": "ws", "path": "/ws" } }, "remote": { "addr": "myserver.example.com:443", "net": "tcp", "trans": { "proto": "ws", "path": "/ws" }, "tls": { "sni": "api.example.com", "skip_verify": false, "enable_early_data": true, "roots": "firefox" } } } ] }

rustls has changed its APIs a lot from 0.19 to 0.20

together with these dependencies:

• webpki
• webpki-roots
• rustls-native-certs
• tokio-rustls

there's a lot of work to do.

I am very lucky to have stumbled upon midori，which free me up from dnat and bring more new features like websocket/h2/quic relay to me

During my use of midori, I encountered a little trouble

I want to use midori to forward traffic to nginx on an intranet for debugging

Because the nginx is configured with server_name, midori is denied when using IP and port access in remote below is my config file content: { "dns_mode": "ipv4_then_ipv6", "endpoints": [{ "listen": { "addr": "0.0.0.0:443", "net": "tcp", "trans": { "proto": "ws", "path": "/ws" } }, "remote": { "addr": "10.49.2.67:443", "net": "tcp", "trans": { "proto": "ws", "path": "/ws" }, "tls": { "sni": "my.server.com", "skip_verify": false, "enable_early_data": true, "roots":"firefox" } } } ] }

I couldn't find something similar to the server_name parameter that can be configured in midori such as "remote": { "addr": "10.49.2.67:443", "server_name":"my.server.com", "net": "tcp", "trans": { "proto": "ws", "path": "/ws" }

I tried to use the domain name in midori, and added the mapping entry between the domain name and the target intranet IP in the hosts file, and I was able to access it normally. Although this can temporarily solve some problems, it is always inconvenient and has some additional side effects

Would you evaluate and consider adding a parameter similar to server_name in midori?

I like your work very much and look forward to the features of kcp being supported soon.

Besides, The technology of multiple outsourcing is very effective in improving the experience of a weak network environment. Some tools (such as hysteria) have implemented this function by using faketcp to bypass the linux protocol stack, which has brought a huge user experience improvement. Is it possible for this technology to be absorbed into midori?

Hi,

I found a strange issue when I try to run demo in https://db.laomoe.com/ with midori. For me, I create a China mobile Nat in public and relay the tcp to US VPS. Here the config:

# China Mobile Nat
{
  "dns_mode": "ipv4_then_ipv6",
  "endpoints": [
    {
      "listen": "[::]:12345",
      "remote": {
        "addr": "[2603:xxxx:c003:xxxx:xxxx:5063:xxxx:xxxx]:3456",
        "net": "tcp",
        "trans": {
          "proto": "ws",
          "path": "/7bba04c83b1b2486736d9b2"
        }
      }
    }
  ]
}

# US VPS
{
  "dns_mode": "ipv4_then_ipv6",
  "endpoints": [
    {
      "remote": "127.0.0.1:443",
      "listen": {
        "addr": "[::]:3456",
        "net": "tcp",
        "trans": {
          "proto": "ws",
          "path": "/7bba04c83b1b2486736d9b2"
        }
      }
    }
  ]
}

And for iperf3, I can relay normally, but for multi thread connect in https://db.laomoe.com/, I can not use bandwidth fully and it just has a random range bandwith(about 5%~50% Normal Bandwidth). But for gost, it run no problem.