-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/02/2015 05:30 PM, Simon Kelley wrote: > > > On 02/02/15 22:20, Brian Haley wrote: > >> The one thing I'm curious about is if dnsmasq is restarted while a VM >> holds a lease, how will it respond? As someone else has pointed-out to >> me - isc-dhcp will respond with a DHCPNAK in that case, and wondered why >> there would be a difference with dnsmasq. Different interpretation of an >> RFC? > > > If by "dnsmasq is restarted" you mean "dnsmasq is restarted and therefore > has its lease database deleted", then the RFC says that if a server gets a > renewal for an unknown lease, it should return DHCPNAK. That's what dnsmasq > does _unless_ --dhcp-authoritative is set, when instead it quietly > re-creates the lease.
Yes, your assumption is correct, as --leasefile-ro is used it knows of no current leases, and by default get a DHCPNAK. > dhcp-authoritative gives permission to dnsmasq to violate the RFC in a way > which is useful in certain circumstances. Thanks, it does seem to do what I want with my initial testing. - -Brian -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUz/5wAAoJEIYQqpVulyUo4/IH/RTpPryLt+1JPmYQTPtUz1vC sU0FBEGTzrg956zQeTSJjBOudVZ1od1RltU0hJ9rKJsQrJylnV9/ucu8iF7VHQwH x678qXK5+0wQADT/Ebd0CfVVIKrbUGlnv+01w0XmlRDaqMXxPAbU3qq0vLyKKi2o 4CR5Q2p70/oKq8lzowWNAej+pnOPg0zFdA2bDKZnFbrdqoFvoUOVhe1FSktwX3Kp OC4hCrbUVcm+f7R3b5yluHKpMr9H6bmgAwx7sKHqYCXFMXW4qm667G6aK/dui2Mt JPOMlq2igm6xcli/OfVAMDLZA36n+yaevTQJIOnhrS8EuYqOV7FkF80T9/wZUns= =hC+F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss