On 9/18/07, ~ Kunal Sharma ~ koolku...@gmail.com wrote:
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
On 9/18/2007, xerces8 (xerc...@butn.net) wrote:
Simple : Do not do any changes to a working system, except the really
necessary ones.
This is so in any serious system.
Of course, I agree that you shouldn't just update willy nilly for no
reason at all, but when there is a *reason* - like,
On 9/17/07, ~ Kunal Sharma ~ koolku...@gmail.com 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
From: richardvo...@gmail.com richardvo...@gmail.com
On 9/17/07, ~ Kunal Sharma ~ koolku...@gmail.com 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
On 18/09/2007, xerces8 xerc...@butn.net 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.
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
Hi Simon,
Yes, I'm using 2.23, so its pretty old but I can't change it now for certain
reasons !
Thanks,
Kunal
On 9/14/07, Simon Kelley si...@thekelleys.org.uk wrote:
~ Kunal Sharma ~ wrote:
Hi Simon,
Many thanks for replying. Basically, I'm trying to add support for the
DHCP
Hi Friends,
I'm new to this list and I'm new to DNSMASQ. Hence, this query !
I need to be able to add/enable support for DHCP option number 125 in my
current implementation.
At this point, since I've not had a look in, I'm not even aware that this is
already there or not.
Would anyone here be
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
