Michael Richardson wrote:
> Yes, it does. When doing a request, you must use address 0.0.0.0 according
> to the spec.
Okay, then it's probably impossible to get correct behaviour with the
current design of pump if there's already another configured interface.
> So, we found the culprit. Why not use ISC dhclient? Frankly, I can't
> see any reason why anyone would want anything else...
I've just tested the Hariguchi/Viznyuk dhcpcd a bit more systematically,
and contrary to what I thought first, it's working correctly (it uses
PF_PACKET sockets). Apologies to the authors. However, there's still
some problem if I try to use the -s option.
BTW, my patch also has the problem that it makes pump fail with kernels
that don't have support for SO_BINDTODEVICE enabled. While one could
just ignore the return code, this is ugly. Also, it may be possible to
have a kernel with the NAT problem but no SO_BINDTODEVICE, so there's
again no way to get it to work.
So I guess I agree - time to dump pump.
/ Werner Almesberger, ICA, EPFL, CH werner.almesberger@xxxxxxxxxxx /