[Dnsmasq-discuss] Wrong configuration processing for multiply DHCP interfaces

Petr Menšík pemensik at redhat.com
Fri Jul 9 11:43:26 UTC 2021


I have not tested it myself, but I believe incoming interfaces are set
as tags. Set tags are visible in log when log-dhcp is used, there should
be tag set for incoming interface.

Have you tried it this way?

dhcp-range=tag:eth2.11,10.11.1.2,10.11.1.201,7200
dhcp-option=tag:eth2.11,3,10.11.1.1
dhcp-option=tag:eth2.11,6,10.11.1.1

Cheers,

Petr

On 7/9/21 10:44 AM, Taras Taranenko via Dnsmasq-discuss wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it looks like we have issue with configuring DHCP DNS OPT 6  for certain interface.
> Here are some examples:
>
> interface=eth2.11
> dhcp-range=interface:eth2.11,10.11.1.2,10.11.1.201,7200
> dhcp-option=interface:eth2.11,3,10.11.1.1
> dhcp-option=interface:eth2.11,6,10.11.1.1
>
> interface=eth2.12
> dhcp-range=interface:eth2.12,10.12.1.2,10.12.1.201,7200
> dhcp-option=interface:eth2.12,3,10.12.1.1
> dhcp-option=interface:eth2.12,6,10.12.1.1
>
> interface=eth2
> dhcp-range=eth2,10.0.1.2,10.0.1.201,7200
> dhcp-option=interface:eth2,3,10.0.1.1
> dhcp-option=interface:eth2,6,10.0.1.1
>
> In such setup, dnsmasq does not including
> OPTION:   6 (  4) DNS server                10.0.1.1
> Into DHCPACK messages send to eth2, but perfectly sending correct DNS IPs to eth2.11 and eth2.12.
>
> I found that even if I have one interface configured and using configuration option of
> dhcp-option=interface:eth2,6,10.0.1.1
> instead of
> dhcp-option=6,10.0.1.1
> I will not get DNS server in responses. Router IP BTW always correct with both variants of configuration.
>
> As for me it looks like a bug.
> Thanx for looking into it.
>
> Best regards,
> Taras Taranenko

-- 
Petr Menšík
Software Engineer
Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/
email: pemensik at redhat.com
PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB





More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list