Am 13.09.2011 12:17, schrieb SpiderX:
If it can be done, it should be done :)
The reason why it should be done in my case not beacuse I'm lazy to
use sub-option 5, but because I just cannot use it.
My switch vendor doesnt support RFC5107, and that the reason why I
can't use dnsmasq, and I'm not
On 13/09/11 18:51, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
There is an issue with libvirt, IPV6 and bridging.
Basically, a recent change to the kernel to not bring carrier up if
bridge port is down breaks things like dnsmasq because IPV6 doesn't
show addresses as available.
Ideally, dnsmasq would just wait
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 8:19 AM, Michael Rack
michael.r...@rsm-freilassing.de wrote:
Am 13.09.2011 12:17, schrieb SpiderX:
If it can be done, it should be done :)
The reason why it should be done in my case not beacuse I'm lazy to
use sub-option 5, but because I just cannot use it.
My
I don't agree. Dnsmasq is a great software, I use it for years in a
small environment.
In bigger networks usage of l2 switches is necessary, and as Michael,
I dont know too any l2 switch that supports any dhcp-related RFC,
except 3046.
There are not some many unix dhcp software that can be
