<div dir="ltr">Sorry for the delay: I had to learn to patch and use a cross-compiling toolset.<div>The update is excellent!</div><div>Everything seems to work as stated:</div><div><ul><li><font size="2">router advertisement log messages no longer indicate explicit dhcp-ranges as constructed</font></li><li><font size="2">'dig' no longer shows duplicate AAAA records for </font>explicit dhcp-range addresses</li><li>'ip -6 addr show' reports 'preferred_lft 0sec' for explicit, deprecated dhcp-range addresses and 'preferred_lft' non-0 for constructed, non-deprecated dhcp-range addresses.</li></ul>I'll keep testing and report any issues as they emerge, but that looks unlikely from the elegant change in your code.<br></div><div>Thanks again for this wonderful project!</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 9:21 AM Simon Kelley <<a href="mailto:simon@thekelleys.org.uk">simon@thekelleys.org.uk</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I just committed<br>
<br>
<a href="http://thekelleys.org.uk/gitweb/?p=dnsmasq.git;a=commit;h=c488b68e75ee5304007eef37203c4fc10193d191" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://thekelleys.org.uk/gitweb/?p=dnsmasq.git;a=commit;h=c488b68e75ee5304007eef37203c4fc10193d191</a><br>
<br>
which suppresses construction of a dhcp-range if there's an explict<br>
dhcp-range already.<br>
<br>
Testing would be very useful.<br>
<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Simon.<br>
<br>
<br>
On 19/04/18 03:38, Luis Marsano wrote:<br>
> Simon Kelley <<a href="mailto:simon@thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">simon@thekelleys.org.uk</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
>> Apologies, there's no way to sue the solution I suggested in current<br>
>> dnsmasq, it was a possible future enhancement.<br>
>><br>
>> On 17/04/18 00:16, Luis Marsano wrote:<br>
>>> Yes, I’d expect that to work, though I’d only know after testing.<br>
>>> Is there a way to do that?<br>
>>> I was using the constructor option to handle dynamic prefixes, which<br>
>>> also need to be advertised.<br>
>>> The option<br>
>>>> dhcp-range=set:lan,::,constructor:br-lan,ra-stateless,ra-names,12h<br>
>>> advertises dynamic prefixes **and** static prefixes: whatever is bound<br>
>>> to the interface, which seems an all or none proposition to me.<br>
>>> If I could exclude the static prefix from the constructed<br>
>>> advertisements, that would work.<br>
>><br>
>> How would you tell which prefixes were static, and which dynamic?<br>
> <br>
> I'd know from having to explicitly setup the static prefixes myself rather than getting them automatically.<br>
> IPv6 prefixes from the 6in4 tunnel broker are static: 6in4 is a static mechanism and the tunnel broker gave me static addresses and prefixes to set up.<br>
> The other global IPv6 addresses and prefixes are potentially dynamic, and automatically appear by enabling IPv6 on the WAN interface: DHCPv6-PD gets a prefix from my ISP, and the openWRT/LEDE router automatically assigns a subnet from that to its LAN interfaces.<br>
> Though I could write out the current prefixes, I have no assurance they'll remain the same later.<br>
> <br>
>>> If I could simply pass an additional option for the static prefix, that<br>
>>> would also work.<br>
>>> Is there a way to do either?<br>
>>> I’m sorry if I missed it in the manual.<br>
>><br>
>> You didn't. I don't think there's any way to do what you want in the<br>
>> current release of dnsmasq. We have to invent a new function to do it.<br>
> <br>
> With the approach you postulated, I might try something like<br>
> <br>
> dhcp-range=set:lan,::,constructor:br-lan,exclude:2001:db8::,ra-stateless,ra-names,12h<br>
> dhcp-range=set:lan,2001:db8::,ra-stateless,ra-names,deprecated<br>
> <br>
> I was imagining an approach like<br>
> <br>
> dhcp-range=set:lan,::,constructor:br-lan,ra-stateless,ra-names,12h<br>
> dhcp-range=set:lan,2001:db8::,ra-stateless,ra-names,deprecated<br>
> <br>
> that merges options and overrides according to some precedence like order or specificity.<br>
> I'm not sure about the best design for a new feature: according to <a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4861#section-6.2.3" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4861#section-6.2.3</a> router advertisements allow each prefix to have its own options, so either design might suffice.<br>
> I was also considering an alternative based on the tag system, though I'm not sure it's meant for that.<br>
> <br>
> Your project is great: whatever solution you think is best is probably a good one.<br>
> <br>
>> Cheers,<br>
>><br>
>> Simon.<br>
> <br>
> Thanks<br>
> <br>
>>> Thanks,<br>
>>> Luis<br>
>>> *From: *Simon Kelley <mailto:<a href="mailto:simon@thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">simon@thekelleys.org.uk</a>><br>
>>> *Sent: *Monday, April 16, 2018 6:37 PM<br>
>>> *To: *<a href="mailto:dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a><br>
>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a>><br>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] Router Advertisement: Prefix-Specific<br>
>>> Options?<br>
>>> <br>
>>> Would this be solved by not constructing a prefix advertisement for<br>
>>> 2001:db8:: when it's already explicitly configured?<br>
>>> <br>
>>> <br>
>>> Cheers,<br>
>>> <br>
>>> Simon.<br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss</a><br>
> <br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk" target="_blank">Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss</a><br>
</blockquote></div>