2015 5:15 PM
To: Vladislav Grishenko
Cc: Brian Haley; Simon Kelley; dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Query about solving a DHCPNAK issue
Let me rephrase it slightly. What is the point of dnsmasq NAKing client
responses to other servers if the clients are being prog
lak...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, June 01, 2015 2:02 PM
>
> *To:* Vladislav Grishenko
> *Cc:* Brian Haley; Simon Kelley; dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
> *Subject:* Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Query about solving a DHCPNAK issue
>
>
>
> I understand, but that eli
m the selected/requested server
> only,
> > > it’s ok.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Best Regards, Vladislav Grishenko
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *From:* Kevin Benton [mailto:blak...@gmail.com]
> >
not?
Best Regards, Vladislav Grishenko
From: Kevin Benton [mailto:blak...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 2:02 PM
To: Vladislav Grishenko
Cc: Brian Haley; Simon Kelley; dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Query about solving a DHCPNAK issue
all naks except from the selected/requested server only,
> > it’s ok.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best Regards, Vladislav Grishenko
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* Kevin Benton [mailto:blak...@gmail.com]
> > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 27, 2015 9:32 AM
> >
; *From:* Kevin Benton [mailto:blak...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 27, 2015 9:32 AM
> *To:* Vladislav Grishenko
> *Cc:* Brian Haley; Simon Kelley; dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
> *Subject:* Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Query about solving a DHCPNAK issue
>
>
>
>
Grishenko
Cc: Brian Haley; Simon Kelley; dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Query about solving a DHCPNAK issue
That fix is interesting. Doesn't ignoring a NAK sort of defeat the point of the
'authoritative' NAKing in the first place?
On Tue, Ma
That fix is interesting. Doesn't ignoring a NAK sort of defeat the point of
the 'authoritative' NAKing in the first place?
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Vladislav Grishenko
wrote:
> > On 02/02/2015 05:47 PM, Brian Haley wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> The one thing I'm curious about is if dnsmasq is re
> On 02/02/2015 05:47 PM, 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 woul
On 02/02/2015 05:47 PM, 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 dnsm
-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
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
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
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/02/2015 03:30 PM, Simon Kelley wrote:
>
> On 02/02/15 19:50, Brian Haley wrote:
>> Hi,
>
>> There have been a number of people chasing an issue in Openstack where
>> dnsmasq was sending DHCPNAK's after it was restarted since it's being
>> start
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/02/15 19:50, Brian Haley wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There have been a number of people chasing an issue in Openstack
> where dnsmasq was sending DHCPNAK's after it was restarted since
> it's being started with --leasefile-ro
> (https://launchpad.net/bu
14 matches
Mail list logo
