[openbeosnetteam] Re: Adventures with DHCP

  • From: Jérome DUVAL <korli@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: <openbeosnetteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:01:28 +0200

Hi Philippe,

i don't really understand your point.
If our stack is faulty, David Enderson's DHCP code would have the very same
problem when integrating it.
So anyway, this kind of ifconfig command shouldn't fail.

Hope i didn't misunderstand the picture :)
Bye,
Jérôme

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Philippe Houdoin" <philippe.houdoin@xxxxxxx>
To: <openbeosnetteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 10:41 AM
Subject: [openbeosnetteam] Re: Adventures with DHCP


> > I've been trying to port ISC DHCP to our stack. However, I've run
> > into
> > a few problems with ifconfig. Specifically, ifconfig doesn't allow
> > you
> > to change any settings of an already configured interface and doesn't
> > allow you to set the broadcast address, nor does it allow setting the
> > netmask to 0.0.0.0. This is essential for dhclient to function
> > properly.
> >
> > It's trying to do this:
> > ifconfig <interface> inet 0.0.0.0 netmask 0.0.0.0 broadcast
> > 255.255.255.255 up
> >
> > Which fails, with results you can observe on your own machine.
>
> :-(
>
> I quicly look into our ifconfig.c and sadly it seems the rejection is
> in our stack, not in our ifconfig tool.
> That's exactly why I don't like userland tools features dependencies.
> I guess we may try to better integrate David Enderson's DHCP code
> deeper into the stack.
> To me, DHCP support is as mandatory as ARP these days...
> I doesn't mean we won't have a command line tool (dhconfig, to be BONE
> compatible?) to control stack's DHCP behavior.
>
> - Philippe
>
>
> --
> Fortune Cookie Says:
>
> If I had any humility I would be perfect.
> -- Ted Turner
>
>


Other related posts: