for servers, there are still issues with that idea (namely, you'd
have to do away with all the tried-and-true network configuration files and
tools that most use on servers).
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Thiago Farina tfrans...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 11:38 PM, Linux Luser
Ah, yes. You will have to add the host-record=mydomain.com,192.168.0.101
line as we discussed earlier.
___
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
) if we're still just
talking about DNS.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Thiago Farina tfrans...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 8:45 PM, Linux Luser linuxlu...@gmail.com wrote:
Wouldn't host-record work?
host-record=mydomain.org,192.168.0.101
Just that? No expand-host, domain
about upstream.
You can have more than one 'server=' line.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Thiago Farina tfrans...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Linux Luser linuxlu...@gmail.com wrote:
host-record will define a single A record for your local network. For all
others, you
, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Linux Luser linuxlu...@gmail.com
wrote:
Are you running dnsmasq through NetworkManager on the server or the
client?
Yes, I'm running it through NetworkManager on the server. :/
I have this in my NetworkManager.conf:
$ cat /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf
[main
Wouldn't host-record work?
host-record=mydomain.org,192.168.0.101
If the hosts on your network are configured to use your dnsmasq instance
for DNS, then they will get back 192.168.0.101 when doing a lookup for
mydomain.org.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Thiago Farina tfrans...@gmail.com
some extra configuration work here, but serving up the 365KB
iPXE image to clients via TFTP is a lot less work then serving up the
entire kernel/initrd package.
On 7/23/2014 11:13 PM, Linux Luser wrote:
I have a project where I use dnsmasq for netboot installs. Currently,
there can
I have a project where I use dnsmasq for netboot installs. Currently, there
can be an unlimited number of installs happened at once. At what point
(number of TFTP transfers happening in parallel) should I be concerned that
I'm overtaxing dnsmasq's TFTP capabilities? Does dnsmasq use threads or
If I understand you correctly, this configuration is being used on the
server with 4 NICs. If so, could you simply supply the addtional
*interface* parameter
to the tftp-root option? Something like ...
tftp-root=/opt/dmi/tftproot/gw94,eth0
tftp-root=/opt/dmi/tftproot/gw95,eth1
Use the set:tagname option in your dhcp-host command. Then use that tag
in it's own dchp-boot command to send a specific boot file to a specific
host.
# PXE response for non-iPXE clients
dhcp-match=set:ipxe,175 # iPXE sends a 175 option
dhcp-boot=tag:!ipxe,ipxe.pxe
# PXE response for host
Kelley si...@thekelleys.org.uk wrote:
On 08/02/14 17:42, Linux Luser wrote:
dhcp-ignore-clid might just work for the long-term. But I ended up
playing around a bit more and I've managed to isolate the part of my
config that I believe triggers the problem. Maybe this can be fixed
without
Correction: I'm getting wildly different IP addresses not wildly
different MAC addresses.
On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Linux Luser linuxlu...@gmail.com wrote:
dhcp-ignore-clid might just work for the long-term. But I ended up
playing around a bit more and I've managed to isolate the part
selectively revoke leases, that would work. Could I do
this? I'm sure that dnsmasq keeps an internal cache, so that would have to
be flushed for a particular lease.
On Jan 30, 2014 2:08 AM, Simon Kelley si...@thekelleys.org.uk wrote:
On 29/01/14 18:04, Linux Luser wrote:
We have a pretty tightly
We have a pretty tightly-controlled private network environment which we've
configured to have a 1-to-1-to-1 relationship between client MAC address,
hostnames and IP addresses. Apart from guest IP ranges, we have control
over when clients get added to the network. Thus, we can detect duplicate
14 matches
Mail list logo
