@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
*Subject:* Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Query about solving a DHCPNAK issue
I understand, but that eliminates the whole 'correcting rouge dhcp offers'
part of the authoritative mode.
If we are teaching clients to ignore NAKs from other DHCP servers, why do
DHCP servers like
:* 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, May 26, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Vladislav Grishenko themi...@mail.ru
wrote
*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
That fix
]
*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
That fix is interesting. Doesn't ignoring a NAK sort of defeat the point
, 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
I
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 programmed to ignore
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, May 26, 2015 at 2
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 themi...@mail.ru
wrote:
On 02/02/2015 05:47 PM, Brian Haley wrote:
The one thing I'm curious about is if dnsmasq
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
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
-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
-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 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
-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
started with
14 matches
Mail list logo
