[Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] RADV: Send same RDNSS address as in DHCPv6

Simon Kelley simon at thekelleys.org.uk
Fri Jan 15 21:37:46 GMT 2016


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 01/01/16 21:07, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Friday 01 January 2016 20:58:42 Simon Kelley wrote:
>> Does the existing behaviour cause you problems? The rationale for
>> why it behaves the way it does is that link-local addresses are
>> good IF client and server are on the same link, since there's no
>> possibility of addresses changing or renumbering. A client
>> getting DNS server addresses from RADV is by definition on the
>> same link as the server. One getting DNS addresses by DHCP is not
>> (there may be a DHCP relay involved) but has DHCP to handle
>> renumbering.
> 
> Hi! Reason is to provide same data over DHCPv6 and over RA. This is
>  really useful to have consistency of connection data in whole
> network.
> 
> When different addresses are sent over DHCPv6 and RA, correct
> client behaviour is to use both (different) addresses in DNS
> configuration.
> 
> But when I'm running one SW which doing everything needed for IPv6
>  client subnetwork configuration I would expect that this SW
> provide same data over all channels. Currently redundant
> information over DHCPv6 and RA is only DNS (for now).
> 

You can certainly configure it to do that, the default does different
things for RA and DHCPv6 for the reasons I gave. Have you seen
problems with those values when using RA and DHCP? If so, that's a
bug, that needs to be fixed,  but otherwise, the best solution for you
may be to configure dnsmasq rather than patching it.

Cheers,

Simon.



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
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=1Lg7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list