On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 04:49:39PM +0100, Simon Kelley wrote: > This situation is rather more complex than it seems at first sight: When > a client first turns up on a network, all the DHCP server knows about is > the physical network to which it is connected: there's no way to tell if > the host is supposed to be on "eth0" or eth0:ucarp" so dnsmasq always > assumes the primary address.
I don't understand this. Why wouldn't I at least have seen the DHCP requests received by dnsmasq in the debug output? And why does the DNS server portion work (as in, receive and reply to packets on that secondary address) but not the DHCP server? > The current development version of dnsmasq adds an option which tells > dnsmasq to assume a named secondary interface instead, which should fix > this. Are you in a position to build from source and test this? Sure. I'd prefer to build the Debian version if possible (so I can use pbuilder, install with dpkg, etc.). Thanks for the quick response. -- Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
