On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 05:22:27PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> I also came across some posts where it suggests that the DUID has to be
> used and that "hardware ethernet" is only for IPv4
Especially when you need to relay DHCPv6 there's currently no real method
to ship around the MAC address of
Hi,
Daniel Pocock wrote:
> > > Ok, I've tried dhcpy6d as well, it seems to offer MAC address matching
> > > (which some people may find convenient) and I've created an ITP for it
> >
> > Not sure why this shouldn't work with ISC's DHCPd. Works fine for me.
> > It's how I distribute IPv4 as well as
On 10/07/13 14:12, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> Ok, I've tried dhcpy6d as well, it seems to offer MAC address matching
>> (which some people may find convenient) and I've created an ITP for it
> Not sure why this shouldn't work with ISC's DHCPd. Works fine for me.
>
Hi Daniel,
Daniel Pocock wrote:
> Ok, I've tried dhcpy6d as well, it seems to offer MAC address matching
> (which some people may find convenient) and I've created an ITP for it
Not sure why this shouldn't work with ISC's DHCPd. Works fine for me.
It's how I distribute IPv4 as well as IPv6 addres
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 11:06:48AM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> It only "just works" like that if the organisation has chosen not to use
> DHCPv6
>
> However, SLAAC doesn't support dynamic DNS updates as far as I know.
> Windows is also using DHCPv6 for obtaining DNS servers. That leaves me
> f
On 08/07/13 10:56, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, 08 Jul 2013 10:14:54 +0200
> Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
>> For IPv4, if somebody doesn't want NM, they can just put
>> iface eth0 inet dhcp
>> in their interfaces file and it works for just about any network.
>> Since wheezy, the line "send
Hello,
On Mon, 08 Jul 2013 10:14:54 +0200
Daniel Pocock wrote:
> For IPv4, if somebody doesn't want NM, they can just put
> iface eth0 inet dhcp
> in their interfaces file and it works for just about any network.
> Since wheezy, the line "send host-name = gethostname();" was added to
> dhclien
On 06/07/13 18:25, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 03:59:41PM -0700, Kenyon Ralph wrote:
>> On 2013-07-05T10:38:44-0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>>> Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>> >> dhcpd does not have to run on the router. DHCPv6 servers are found
>>> by
>>> >> multicast. U
I'm currently solving this using a script and some dhcpd-scripting for
DDNS.
Providing that the clients use the standard mangling to get an ipv6
address from the prefix and MAC address, then this works. If they're
using the privacy extensions, then I'm assuming they don't want a DNS
entry anywa
Hello,
On Sat, 6 Jul 2013 09:29:22 -0700
Philipp Kern wrote:
> > You can use guessnet with a custom test script to select one of the
> > configuration you need based on the rdisc6/ndisc6 output. Probably,
> > we can have it in guessnet as a built-in test.
> PS: I stand to my original statement
On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 08:48:09PM +0200, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> You can use guessnet with a custom test script to select one of the
> configuration you need based on the rdisc6/ndisc6 output. Probably, we
> can have it in guessnet as a built-in test.
Or just have a daemon listen to netlink event
On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 03:59:41PM -0700, Kenyon Ralph wrote:
> On 2013-07-05T10:38:44-0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> > Daniel Pocock wrote:
> > >> dhcpd does not have to run on the router. DHCPv6 servers are found
> > by
> > >> multicast. Unless you set M=1 in your RAs, your hosts
On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 08:43:27PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
>
> On 05/07/13 20:14, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 10:12:24 -0700 Philipp Kern
> > wrote:
> >
> >>> Is there a way to configure the interfaces file to "just work"
> >>> on any network, without Netw
On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 03:29:33PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> One issue I've observed on older machines that have been upgraded is
> that the IPv6 setting in NetworkManager is sometimes set to "Ignored"
> while on fresh installs it is in "Automatic" mode - so people who have
> upgraded need to g
On 2013-07-05T10:38:44-0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Daniel Pocock wrote:
> >> dhcpd does not have to run on the router. DHCPv6 servers are found by
> >> multicast. Unless you set M=1 in your RAs, your hosts will not use
> >> DHCPv6 for address allocation, so it makes little sen
Hello,
On Fri, 05 Jul 2013 20:43:27 +0200
Daniel Pocock wrote:
> > Not true.
> Let me put it another way, I can see various permutations:
> a) If the user has nothing in interfaces, then the IPv6 will just do
> SLAAC by itself anyway. If it receives an RA with M=1 it won't have
> any dhclient
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 05/07/13 20:14, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 10:12:24 -0700 Philipp Kern
> wrote:
>
>>> Is there a way to configure the interfaces file to "just work"
>>> on any network, without NetworkManager?
>
>> Nope.
>
> Not t
Hello,
On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 10:12:24 -0700
Philipp Kern wrote:
> > Is there a way to configure the interfaces file to "just work" on
> > any network, without NetworkManager?
> Nope.
Not true.
--
WBR, Andrew
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 12:10:11PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> For IPv6, radvd is on the router: it is not clear whether dhcpd has to
> run on the router as well or can they be different hosts (e.g. radvd on
> the router and dhcpd on the Debian server)?
They can be on different hosts, although r
On 05/07/13 18:27, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Daniel Pocock wrote:
> >> okay my observation is that client side dhcpv6 is unusual still at
> >> this point. Certainly none of my phone/tablet devices will do that,
> >> and they all speak ipv6 RA just fine.
>
> > I agree that th
Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> okay my observation is that client side dhcpv6 is unusual still at
>> this point. Certainly none of my phone/tablet devices will do that,
>> and they all speak ipv6 RA just fine.
> I agree that the RA stuff works fine - the problem is getting DDNS to
Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> dhcpd does not have to run on the router. DHCPv6 servers are found by
>> multicast. Unless you set M=1 in your RAs, your hosts will not use
>> DHCPv6 for address allocation, so it makes little sense to attempt to
>> tie DNS updates to DHCPv6 in my opinion
On 05/07/13 16:38, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Daniel Pocock wrote:
> >> dhcpd does not have to run on the router. DHCPv6 servers are found by
> >> multicast. Unless you set M=1 in your RAs, your hosts will not use
> >> DHCPv6 for address allocation, so it makes little sense to attem
Daniel Pocock wrote:
> After getting servers onto IPv6, I recently had a go at trying to run
> IPv6 on a LAN with workstations
> Currently, for IPv4 a) dhcpd does not run on the router, it runs on a
> Debian server b) the LAN uses DHCP and dynamic DNS updates between
> isc-dh
On 05/07/13 15:09, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Daniel Pocock wrote:
> > After getting servers onto IPv6, I recently had a go at trying to run
> > IPv6 on a LAN with workstations
>
> > Currently, for IPv4 a) dhcpd does not run on the router, it runs on a
> > Debian server b) the LAN
After getting servers onto IPv6, I recently had a go at trying to run
IPv6 on a LAN with workstations
Currently, for IPv4
a) dhcpd does not run on the router, it runs on a Debian server
b) the LAN uses DHCP and dynamic DNS updates between isc-dhcp and bind
For IPv6, radvd is on the router: it is
26 matches
Mail list logo
