On 2018/06/11 07:39, Il Ka wrote: > >Which RFC? > It says "IP addresses for routers on the client's subnet", so my idea was > that router must be on client subnet. > > >We already deal with this for the case fairly common in VPS where the > >client gets a /32 with a router outside the subnet > But how does it work from client side? > Does your dhcpd server send static route to router?
The general case: you run dhclient, it works. > >How did you configure the rest of networking on the router to cope > >with this setup? > > I have interface with 10.10.10.1 and dhcpd server with configuration > provided above, > I then run dhcpcd (I have not tried it with ICS dhcp client) and got broken > routing. So you tell the client that the router is at 126.96.36.199, but you don't have anything at 188.8.131.52. This cannot possibly work, the client can't find the lladdr of the gateway - it's not a valid test. > Here is my point: in some installations gateway may reside outside of client > network. > Is it valid? It works on other OS. It works on OpenBSD for the /32 case. > If it is, then why do we need to fix client (why do we need this patch?)? It doesn't work on OpenBSD for the non-/32 case. > It it is not, then should not dhcpd log warnings about such configuration? A warning? Perhaps. You proposed making it an error before, which I don't think is helpful. For a start it would make it harder to test krw's diff :-)