classless static route option

   *** From dhcp-server -- To unsubscribe, see the end of
this message. ***

Hi Holger,

thanks, this statement I found also in the dhcp-options
manual page, and while 
googling for an answer. unfortunately the classless static
routes option is 
not mentioned in this manual page, therefore I would like to
know whether it 
is implemented or not, and if yes, if anybody could provide
an example would 
be great.

kind regards
Sebastian

dhcp-serverisc.org wrote: 
>    *** From dhcp-server -- To unsubscribe, see the end
of this message. ***
> 
> Hi Sebastian,
> 
> this what I found in the famous "DHCP
Handbook":
> 
> Cahpter 9 p. 140:
> 
> NOTE:
> Since the definition of classless interdomain routing
(CIDR), the static
> routes option is no longer useful. The classless static
routes option
> carries routes with subnet masks and should be used in
place of the
> static routes option.
> 
> 
> HTH!
> 
> Regards
> 
> Holger
> 
> Sebastian Reitenbach schrieb:
> >    *** From dhcp-server -- To unsubscribe, see the
end of this message. 
***
> >
> > Hi list,
> >
> > does the classless static route option, as
described in rft 3442, is 
> > implemented in the isc dhcp server and client?
> > I got a bit confused reading the dhcp-options(5)
manual page
> >
> > first I read:
> > option static-routes
> > ...
> >           The default route (0.0.0.0) is an 
illegal  destination
> >           for  a static route.  To specify the
default route, use
> >           the routers  option.    Also,  please 
note  that  this
> >           option  is  not  intended for classless
IP routing - it
> >           does not include a subnet mask.    Since
 classless  IP
> >           routing  is  now the most widely
deployed routing stan­
> >           dard, this option is  virtually 
useless,  and  is  not
> >           implemented  by  any  of  the popular
DHCP clients, for
> >           example the Microsoft DHCP client.
> >
> > but later I see this example under the RECORDS
section:
> >
> >        option static-routes
> >             10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0
net-0-rtr.example.com 1,
> >             10.0.1.0 255.255.255.0
net-1-rtr.example.com 1,
> >             10.2.0.0 255.255.224.0
net-2-0-rtr.example.com 3;
> >
> > interpreting the latter, I have the network
address, followed by the 
netmask, 
> > followed by the default gateway and the metric, is
that correct?
> >
> >
> > kind regards
> > Sebastian
> >


------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
List Archives : http://www.isc.org/ops/
lists/
Unsubscribe   : http://www.
isc.org/sw/dhcp/dhcp-lists.php    
-or-          : mailto:dhcp-server-requestisc.org?Subject=unsubscribe  
------------------------------------------------------------
-----------

   *** From dhcp-server -- To unsubscribe, see the end of
this message. ***

Sebastian Reitenbach wrote:

>thanks, this statement I found also in the dhcp-options
manual page, and while
>googling for an answer. unfortunately the classless
static routes option is
>not mentioned in this manual page, therefore I would
like to know whether it
>is implemented or not, and if yes, if anybody could
provide an example would
>be great.

What do you actually want to do with it ?

In most normal networks, I'd strongly recommend against
doing any 
routing (beyond default router) on the clients, and simply
set up the 
network routers correctly. It's sufficient to have one
default router 
as long as all the routers are correctly set up to either
forward or 
do redirects, and have a correct routing table themselves.

The tiny overhead of redirects is far less of a problem than
just one 
screwed up client config !

Simon

------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
List Archives : http://www.isc.org/ops/
lists/
Unsubscribe   : http://www.
isc.org/sw/dhcp/dhcp-lists.php    
-or-          : mailto:dhcp-server-requestisc.org?Subject=unsubscribe  
------------------------------------------------------------
-----------