Hi! I am new maintainer of dnsmasq package in RHEL. I am looking for potential problems with upgrade from dnsmasq 2.66 to version 2.76. And I have found something. Commit  changed behaviour of --interface eth0:0 behavior.
The first problem is, manual page is not updated. It tells you cannot use labels, but you can. Also it does not tell you you can use -i eth0,eth0:0,eth0:1,lo, but that is minor change. Labels are now supported and dnsmasq is able to bind only to secondary IPv4 interface with different address. (Since 2.67!) It works well with --bind-interfaces. However it has inconsistent behavior with and without that option. Let's say my configuration is: 4: virbr0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP group default qlen 1000 link/ether 52:54:00:2b:ee:d3 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 192.168.122.1/24 brd 192.168.122.255 scope global virbr0 valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever inet 192.168.122.254/24 scope global secondary virbr0:1 valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever $ dnsmasq -i virbr0 will respond to queries to both addresses. It might be useful backward compatibility feature. However $ dnsmasq -i virbr0:1 Will respond only on address 192.168.122.254. Ok, call it a feature. Problem is, $ dnsmasq -i virbr0 -z Will respond only on address 192.168.122.1, as I would expect. $ dnsmasq -i virbr0:1 -z Behaves the same way, as without -z. I think different behavior is an error. It might be a feature, but even then, it has to be documented. Opinions?  http://thekelleys.org.uk/gitweb/?p=dnsmasq.git;a=commit;h=3f2873d42c4d7e7dba32b6e64a3687d43928bc8e Cheers, Petr -- Petr Menšík Software Engineer Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/ email: pemen...@redhat.com PGP: 65C6C973 _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasqfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss