Report information
The Basics
Id:
24572
Status:
open
Priority:
Low/Low
Queue:

People
Owner:
Nobody in particular
Cc:
AdminCc:

BugTracker
Version Fixed:
(no value)
Version Found:
(no value)
Versions Affected:
(no value)
Versions Planned:
(no value)
Priority:
(no value)
Severity:
(no value)
CVSS Score:
(no value)
CVE ID:
(no value)
Component:
(no value)
Area:
(no value)

Dates
Created:Thu, 19 May 2011 11:37:46 -0400
Updated:Wed, 21 Mar 2018 14:13:26 -0400
Closed:Not set



This bug tracker is no longer active.

Please go to our Gitlab to submit issues (both feature requests and bug reports) for active projects maintained by Internet Systems Consortium (ISC).

Due to security and confidentiality requirements, full access is limited to the primary maintainers.

Subject: RFC3442 - The Classless Static Route Option
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 17:37:15 +0200
To: dhcp-suggest@isc.org
From: Jiri Popelka <jpopelka@redhat.com>
Hi, I know that you have probably already seen several RFC 3442 (The Classless Static Route Option) implementation requests. For example this one https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/dhcp-users/2008-December/007638.html but I'll add one more. Today Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 6.1 has been released and the ISC dhcp shipped with it contains (my) implementation of RFC3442, because it had been requested by several customers. The ISC dhcp in Fedora distribution (something like unstable RHEL) has been shipped with this implementation since August 2010. I'm not sending patches this time because I know they are not perfect and that you would implement it in your own way, so here are only the git commits for your inspiration: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=dhcp.git;a=commitdiff;h=fe8e8224b5cbd10550a02c6427f388cc34b4274e http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=dhcp.git;a=commitdiff;h=f26a061db4b8aa6e8034c84a66b46e7c79d63072 But I can of course create and attach patch against the latest ISC dhcp version on demand. Fedora ticket (just for info) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516325 with regards, Jiri Popelka Red Hat, inc.
Hi

Thank you for your suggestion. 

While it is true that we might chose a different implementation than yours it would probably be useful to have yours to consider.  However it is also the case that this issue is not on our immediate roadmap and I'm not sure when we will get to it.  If it's easy for you to do so I suggest that you attache the diff for your changes to this ticket.  That way when we do get the time to look at the ticket all the information will be available.


Subject: Re: [ISC-Bugs #24572] RFC3442 - The Classless Static Route Option
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 16:12:40 +0200
To: dhcp-suggest@isc.org
From: Jiri Popelka <jpopelka@redhat.com>
Hi, I'm attaching the patch for RFC 3442 support. Hope it will be useful. With regards, Jiri Popelka Red Hat, inc. On 05/26/2011 08:16 PM, Shawn Routhier via RT wrote: > Hi > > Thank you for your suggestion. > > While it is true that we might chose a different implementation than yours it > would probably be useful to have yours to consider. However it is also the case > that this issue is not on our immediate roadmap and I'm not sure when we will > get to it. If it's easy for you to do so I suggest that you attache the diff > for your changes to this ticket. That way when we do get the time to look at > the ticket all the information will be available.

Message body is not shown because sender requested not to inline it.

 Thank you for the patch.  We'll try to figure out where this fits in our roadmap.

Shawn