[Dnsmasq-discuss] Query about solving a DHCPNAK issue

[Brian Haley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/02/2015 05:30 PM, Simon Kelley wrote:
> 
> 
> On 02/02/15 22:20, Brian Haley wrote:
> 
>> The one thing I'm curious about is if dnsmasq is restarted while a VM
>> holds a lease, how will it respond?  As someone else has pointed-out to
>> me - isc-dhcp will respond with a DHCPNAK in that case, and wondered why
>> there would be a difference with dnsmasq. Different interpretation of an
>> RFC?
> 
> 
> If by "dnsmasq is restarted" you mean "dnsmasq is restarted and therefore
> has its lease database deleted", then the RFC says that if a server gets a
> renewal for an unknown lease, it should return DHCPNAK. That's what dnsmasq
> does _unless_ --dhcp-authoritative is set, when instead it quietly
> re-creates the lease.

Yes, your assumption is correct, as --leasefile-ro is used it knows of no
current leases, and by default get a DHCPNAK.

> dhcp-authoritative gives permission to dnsmasq to violate the RFC in a way
> which is useful in certain circumstances.

Thanks, it does seem to do what I want with my initial testing.

- -Brian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUz/5wAAoJEIYQqpVulyUo4/IH/RTpPryLt+1JPmYQTPtUz1vC
sU0FBEGTzrg956zQeTSJjBOudVZ1od1RltU0hJ9rKJsQrJylnV9/ucu8iF7VHQwH
x678qXK5+0wQADT/Ebd0CfVVIKrbUGlnv+01w0XmlRDaqMXxPAbU3qq0vLyKKi2o
4CR5Q2p70/oKq8lzowWNAej+pnOPg0zFdA2bDKZnFbrdqoFvoUOVhe1FSktwX3Kp
OC4hCrbUVcm+f7R3b5yluHKpMr9H6bmgAwx7sKHqYCXFMXW4qm667G6aK/dui2Mt
JPOMlq2igm6xcli/OfVAMDLZA36n+yaevTQJIOnhrS8EuYqOV7FkF80T9/wZUns=
=hC+F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----