Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Support for DHCP option 125
Actually, this is a pretty stable system and changing something as important as dnsmasq is fraught with risks. Apart from that, the management hasn't allocated enough time for me to be able to upgrade to the latest version and test all the related functionalities. I do hope, however, that the version I'm using does not have critical bugs or restrictions. Thanks, Kunal On 9/18/07, richardvo...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On 9/17/07, ~ Kunal Sharma ~ wrote: > > > > Hi Simon, > > > > Yes, I'm using 2.23, so its pretty old but I can't change it now for > > certain reasons ! > > > > Thanks, > > Kunal > > > May I inquire as to the rationale that allows modifications to dnsmasq but > not upgrade to the latest version? > > > On 9/14/07, Simon Kelley wrote: > > > > > > ~ Kunal Sharma ~ wrote: > > > > Hi Simon, > > > > > > > > Many thanks for replying. Basically, I'm trying to add support for > > > the > > > > DHCP requirements that are needed for DSL Forum's TR-111 standard, > > > > in my gateway device. > > > > > > > > >The existing support for non-vendor-identifying encapsulated > > > options is > > > > >in two places. The data gets laid out in the packet in the second > > > half > > > > >of do_options() in src/rfc2131.c. > > > > > > > > I hope you're talking about do_opt() or do_req_options() because I > > > don't > > > > find do_options() in the code. > > > > > > I'm talking about do_options(). It sounds like you have an older > > > release. The current release is 2.40. Unless you have very good > > > reasons > > > why not, it's best to work from that. > > > > > > > > > > > And yes, I'm aware of GNU GPL. I just meant to make sure the author > > > > does not place any proprietary licence. So. I'll definitely share > > > the source > > > > once I'm done with this. > > > > > > GPL v2 for all current releases. It's possible that future releases > > > will > > > be GPL v3, see current posts in this groups. > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Simon. > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again, > > > > Kunal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list > > Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk > > http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss > > > > >
Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Support for DHCP option 125
On 18/09/2007, xerces8 wrote: [snip] > > May I inquire as to the rationale that allows modifications to dnsmasq but > > not upgrade to the latest version? > > Simple : Do not do any changes to a working system, except the really > necessary ones. > > This is so in any serious system. > > Regards, > David Surely making modifications to the source code has much more potential for breaking things than upgrading to a newer version? Many thanks Kevin
Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Support for DHCP option 125
From: "richardvo...@gmail.com" > On 9/17/07, ~ Kunal Sharma ~ wrote: > > > > Hi Simon, > > > > Yes, I'm using 2.23, so its pretty old but I can't change it now for > > certain reasons ! > > > > Thanks, > > Kunal > > > May I inquire as to the rationale that allows modifications to dnsmasq but > not upgrade to the latest version? Simple : Do not do any changes to a working system, except the really necessary ones. This is so in any serious system. Regards, David
Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Support for DHCP option 125
On 9/17/07, ~ Kunal Sharma ~ wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > Yes, I'm using 2.23, so its pretty old but I can't change it now for > certain reasons ! > > Thanks, > Kunal May I inquire as to the rationale that allows modifications to dnsmasq but not upgrade to the latest version? On 9/14/07, Simon Kelley wrote: > > > > ~ Kunal Sharma ~ wrote: > > > Hi Simon, > > > > > > Many thanks for replying. Basically, I'm trying to add support for the > > > DHCP requirements that are needed for DSL Forum's TR-111 standard, > > > in my gateway device. > > > > > > >The existing support for non-vendor-identifying encapsulated options > > is > > > >in two places. The data gets laid out in the packet in the second > > half > > > >of do_options() in src/rfc2131.c. > > > > > > I hope you're talking about do_opt() or do_req_options() because I > > don't > > > find do_options() in the code. > > > > I'm talking about do_options(). It sounds like you have an older > > release. The current release is 2.40. Unless you have very good reasons > > why not, it's best to work from that. > > > > > > > > And yes, I'm aware of GNU GPL. I just meant to make sure the author > > > does not place any proprietary licence. So. I'll definitely share the > > source > > > once I'm done with this. > > > > GPL v2 for all current releases. It's possible that future releases will > > be GPL v3, see current posts in this groups. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Simon. > > > > > > > > Thanks again, > > > Kunal > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list > Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk > http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss > >
