[Dnsmasq-discuss] dhcp-range broke in 2.76

Simon Kelley simon at thekelleys.org.uk
Thu Jul 7 15:46:10 BST 2016


http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2016q1/010386.html
is relevant.

the short answer is that your dhcp-range never was valid, and parsing
has been tightened up to reject it rather than misunderstanding it.

Cheers,

Simon.



On 06/07/16 15:31, Matthew Keeler wrote:
> I have been using dnsmasq for a while on my local network with several dhcp
> ranges specified. One of them no longer parses in v2.76 although it did in
> v2.75.
> 
> dhcp-range=10.3.2.1,10.3.2.127,static,255.255.254.0,infinite
> 
> It looks like it is now no longer valid to have a start and end ipv4
> address with the static mode where this was allowed previously. Was this an
> intentional removal? My understanding (which may be incorrect) was that to
> have a ip range reserved for dhcp reservations required having the dhcp
> range specified and the dhcp-hosts specified to ips that fall within that
> range. Then that range would have the static mode to prevent auto
> assignment of ips to other unknown hosts.
> 
> If this is intended behavior and not a bug, how can I allocate an IP range
> for DHCP reservations? I think something like the following should work to
> produce the same results although it is a rather ugly solution as it
> requires adding tags in many, many places.
> 
> dhcp-range=tag:reserved,10.3.2.1,10.3.2.127,255.255.254.0,infinite
> dhcp-host=00:01:02:03:04:05,set:reserved,10.3.2.7,myhost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
> Dnsmasq-discuss at lists.thekelleys.org.uk
> http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
> 




More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list