classless routes

[Simon Hobson]

Enrique de Guindos Carretero wrote:

>subnet  192.168.0.0  netmask 255.255.255.0
>{
>         pool
>         {
>                 range   192.168.0.15    192.168.0.50;
>                 option ca-static-routes 24, 192,168,0,0, 192,168,0,1;
>         }
>}

What are you trying to achieve here ?
192.168.0.0/24 is local to the client, therefore it makes no sense to 
be setting a route to it via another host.


>But as soon as a Linux dhcp client boots, it has the normal route table,
>same as if I do not put the code 121 option:
>
>linux_client#> route
>
>Destination   Gateway      Genmask        Flags   Metric   Ref   Use   Iface
>192.168.0.0   *                 255.255.255.0 U         0          0
>0       eth0
>default          192.168.0.1  0.0.0.0           UG       0          0
>0       eth0
>
>And I think I should expect something like
>
>Destination   Gateway   ...
>192.168.0.0  192.168.0.1
>
>The above is what I observe on Windows Clients if I add an option for code
>249 instead (or together with) of code 121.

Then I'd say it's the Windows client that is broken !