On 20/07/18 08:55, Roy Marples wrote:
> On 19/07/2018 21:34, Simon Kelley wrote:
>> This generates multiple instance of the DHCP option 121 in the DHCP
>> reply packet, which isn't strictly legal.
>
> What makes you think it's not legal?
> RFC3442 makes no mention of it not being legal and RFC3396
On 19/07/2018 21:34, Simon Kelley wrote:
This generates multiple instance of the DHCP option 121 in the DHCP
reply packet, which isn't strictly legal.
What makes you think it's not legal?
RFC3442 makes no mention of it not being legal and RFC3396 describes how
multiple instances of options sho
This generates multiple instance of the DHCP option 121 in the DHCP
reply packet, which isn't strictly legal.
You can include an option 121 with as many routes as you want quite
easily withouyt patching the code.
--dhcp-option=121,127.0.0.1/8,1.2.3.4,192.168.0.0/16,3.4.5.6
Cheers,
Simon.
On
Hi,
this patch allows to configure multiple static routes as defined by RFC3442.
Regards
Sam
multiple-static-routes.diff
Description: Binary data
___
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
http://lists.thekelleys.or
