On 11/10/12 19:52, Gene Czarcinski wrote: > I got a bit of a surprise today when I discovered that it is not > possible to run more that one dhcp6 server on a single host. This > appears to be true whether it is an ISC-dhcpd6 server and dnsmasq or two > dnsmasq servers. They each want exclusive use of UDP6 port 547. > > With IPv4, you could run multiple dhcpd servers with each on dealing > with a specific network and this is useful in qemu/kvm/libvirt > implementation of virtualization where a dnsmasq is started for each > virtual network. > > I assume there is some reason for this situation and that it has > something to do with how IPv6 protocol is defined.
It's not actually anything to do with IPv6 as such, more that the BSD sockets API makes it very hard to do. Getting it to work for IPv4 took a lot of hassle, some significant compromises, and some very unportable code. (It doesn't work on *BSD, still, for example). I don't think there's any reason why the same shouldn't be attempted for Ipv6, it hasn't because getting DHCPv6 to just work was the first priority. The nature of the beast is that there are no guarantees that it will work before it's been tried. > > OK, it is what is. Is there some practical way to "tell" dnsmasq an > association for a hostname and an IPv6 address? I cannot see something > like that used to update an authoritative name server but it would be > useful to have some kind of an update capability with dnsmasq. If I've understood your question right, that's what dhcp-host does. Cheers, Simon. _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
