Hallo, Simon, Du meintest am 28.02.12:
>>>> Just for curiosity: >>>> >>>> a) should we delete a line >>>> >>>> interface=lo >>>> >>>> too? >>> Yes, of course. > To be clear, if there are NO "interface=" lines, then dnsmasq will > respond to all interfaces. But something doesn't work - see my other mail in this thread. Without any "interface=" line: Thunderbird mailing doesn't work, getting a DHCP address doesn't work. > If there are ANY "interface=" lines, it > will respond to just those interfaces, but it will always respond to > loopback interfaces, you don't need to list them. Just tested: without "interface=lo" mailing with Thunderbird doesn't work. > Going back to the original problem: look in the logs. If you see > nothing, then the problem is access control (interface=, address=) or > firewall. But the problem seems to be related only with the existence or non- existence of the "interface=" lines. > If you see lines saying there's no address range available, > then the dhcp-range is wrong and doesn't match the address of the > interface. No such line. > Take firewall configuration seriously: it trips up lots of people. see above: with existing "interface=" lines most things work well. What still doesn't work: getting a DHCP IP address for the second NIC. Viele Gruesse! Helmut _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
