[Kea-users] DDNS update for win10 clients

Dominik Epple dominik.epple at gmail.com
Sun Oct 22 18:47:00 UTC 2017


Hi,

thanks for the clarification. I think we got a "works as designed"
situation: The flags are indeed numerically zero, as I can see in
wireshark... the full option 81 is like

    0000   51 08 00 00 00 41 50 46 45 4c                    Q....APFEL

Okay for me -- thinking twice about the situation makes me wonder if my
initial expectation that we should get forward DNS entries is justified or
whether it is just fine that we dont have A DNS entries. Probably my
expectation was just motivated by symmetry...

Funny RFC, though... inverse logic between the N and S flags, where a value
of 0 indicates in one flag (N) that the server SHOULD perform (reverse) DNS
updates, and in the other value (S) it indicates the server SHOULD NOT
perform DNS (forward) updates.

> note there is a ticket about making dhcp-ddns setting local from a
similar feature in ISC DHCP (e.g. in a client class matching MSFT vendor
class).

Sounds to me like this makes a lot of sense.

Thanks again for looking into this.

Regards
Dominik

2017-10-22 14:33 GMT+02:00 Francis Dupont <fdupont at isc.org>:

> Thomas Markwalder writes:
> > However this will override the flags for all clients.
>
> => note there is a ticket about making dhcp-ddns setting local
> from a similar feature in ISC DHCP (e.g. in a client class matching
> MSFT vendor class).
>
> Regards
>
> Francis Dupont <fdupont at isc.org>
>
> PS: I apologize for the reuse of the thread for something clearly for
> kea-dev
> _______________________________________________
> Kea-users mailing list
> Kea-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/kea-users/attachments/20171022/5d970678/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Kea-users mailing list