On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Michael Rack <michael.r...@rsm-freilassing.de> wrote: > > Why is schema 2 safe you one ip per interface? You need a ip-address for > routing, so that should be that ip-address dnsmasq is listing on. Or is > your router not the same device where your dnsmasq is running on? > > Have your interfaces a /30 Network assigned? Or are they all bind on a > bridged interface on your Unix-Router with only one ip-address-range /24 > or something else? > > Liebe Grüße aus Freilassing, > > Michael Rack > RSM Freilassing > -- > RSM Freilassing Tel.: +49 8654 607110 > Nocksteinstr. 13 Fax.: +49 8654 670438 > D-83395 Freilassing www.rsm-freilassing.de > > > Am 15.09.2011 14:25, schrieb SpiderX: > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 5:42 PM, richardvo...@gmail.com > > <richardvo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> I don't agree. Dnsmasq is a great software, I use it for years in a > >>> small environment. > >>> In bigger networks usage of l2 switches is necessary, and as Michael, > >>> I dont know too any l2 switch that supports any dhcp-related RFC, > >>> except 3046. > >>> There are not some many unix dhcp software that can be used with l2 > >>> switches, dnsmasq could be one of it. And, as I said earlier, it > >>> should be. > >>> Solution with taking preference circuit-id and remote-id over > >>> sub-option 5 can be implemented as switch, documented with warning in > >>> manual, not enabled by default in example config. > >> dnsmasq works great in conjunction with L2 switches. Usually you put > >> the dnsmasq node on a VLAN trunk port, that way it sees requests from > >> all circuits, along with the VLAN tag. I'm not sure why you've chosen > >> to relay to a non-trunk port instead. > > Let's take a look on situation. There is a network with access type > > vlan per user or vlan per switch (not fundamentally), > > which builded on globally routed ip addresses (I mean "white ips", not > > 10.0.0.0/8, etc.) > > > > Sheme 1 > > client — broadcast — l2 switch's port 1 — broadcast — server (dhcp > > listening on interface with utilization of one ip in subnet) > > client — broadcast — l2 switch's port 2 — broadcast — server (dhcp > > listening on interface with utilization of one ip in subnet) > > .............. > > client — broadcast — l2 switch's port 24 — broadcast — server (dhcp > > listening on interface with utilization of one ip in subnet) > > > > Sheme 2 > > client — broadcast — l2 switch's port 1 — unicast — server (dhcp > > listening on interface with utilization of one ip in subnet) > > client — broadcast — l2 switch's port 2 — unicast — server (dhcp > > listening on interface with utilization of one ip in subnet) > > ............. > > client — broadcast — l2 switch's port 24 — unicast — server (dhcp > > listening on interface with utilization of one ip in subnet) > > Dhcp is listening on one interface and utilizes one ip address. This > > ip/interface is not directly accessible by clients. > > > > Which of these schemes is more safer and more reliable? > > Which of these schemes is easier to maintain? > > Which scheme is more economically viable? (I don't lose one ip per > > interface with dhcp server listening on it. One ip = one client.) > > Dnsmasq can be used in scheme 1, but not in scheme 2. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list > > Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk > > http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list > Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk > http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
> Or is your router not the same device where your dnsmasq is running on? Exactly. > Have your interfaces a /30 Network assigned? Or are they all bind on a > bridged interface on your Unix-Router with only one ip-address-range /24 > or something else? Actually It doesn't matter. I use supervlan aka ip unnumbered in one network, in another (vlan per switch) I use just a subnets /24, /25, /26 on interfaces.