YazDHCP YazDHCP - feature expansion of DHCP assignments (increasing limit on the number of DHCP reservations)

[Tom Ames]

Yee-haaa! I've been waiting for this. Gotta go take a look right now!
Thanks!

 

[JohnD5000]

Upgraded from 386.1_2 on RT-AC86U to 386.2beta1. Tried to change an icon on a manually assigned DHCP address. A list of choices (not icons.."Electronic Devices", "Media and Entertainment", etc.) comes up, but none of choices are selectable except for the "+" to select a external icon. In other words, there are no internal icons?

Is this related to YazDHCP?

EDIT: NEVER MIND.......NEED TO CLEAR BROWSER CACHE!!

 

[BreakingDad]

Installed, no issues. Just need to buy another 19 internet devices to fully enjoy.

 

[Jack Yaz]

Installed, no issues. Just need to buy another 19 internet devices to fully enjoy.

i'm secretly a plant from "Big Tech" to drive people to buy more devices

 

[BreakingDad]

i'm secretly a plant from "Big Tech" to drive people to buy more devices

Fine by me, perhaps my American tech stock will start rising a bit more than recent dips.

 

[BreakingDad]

Was wondering, is there any way of increasing the DHCP lease time (via the GUI) with this? without manually hacking the dnsmasq.con file ? (Or adding it as a feature?)

 

[mcse]

Might there be a future enhancement to allow reservations of YaZFi subnet devices to be added? (via router's gui)

Presume that manual editing of YazDHCP files would be OK, though edits might lost after using GUI.

=========

Update...

Worse than I thought. Rather than simply "losing" the manually added entries, the non-default range IP addresses are changed to the "default" DHCP network address; e.g.

.staticlist

FF:FF:99:99:99:00,set:FF:FF:99:99:99:00,10.10.24.10​

becomes​

FF:FF:99:99:99:00,set:FF:FF:99:99:99:00,192.168.1.10​

DHCP_clients

FF:FF:99:99:99:00,10.10.24.10,my-device,​

becomes​

FF:FF:99:99:99:00,192.168.1.10,my-device,​

.hostnames

10.10.24.10 my-device​

becomes​

192.168.1.10 my-device​

=======

Once you manually edit these files, don't use the GUI

 

[JohnD5000]

amtm just now added support for YazDHCP, see the amtm 3.1.9 release thread.

Jack,

You only have 2 more free spots on AMTM then all your slots will be full!

 

[thelonelycoder]

Jack,

You only have 2 more free spots on AMTM then all your slots will be full!

Last time I left my cave to discuss hunting mammoth tactics with my fellow neanderthals, I counted two hands and three fingers attendance. There are more than one digit-fingers known to man.

 

[JohnD5000]

Last time I left my cave to discuss hunting mammoth tactics with my fellow neanderthals, I counted two hands and three fingers attendance. There are more than one digit-fingers known to man.

Wouldn't it be easier to have Jack be less prolific with the scripts than trying to do all that hard evolution stuff?

 

[technotic]

I encountered a bug with YazDHCP on 386.2, on a RT-AC58U. I skimmed the thread but didn't see it mentioned.

YazDHCP seems to expect a /24 netmask. My network uses 10.20.0.0/23. My dhcp server is set to assign ip addresses from 10.20.1.100-199. the server is at 10.20.1.1. when I try to assign a reservation to device using the lower 10.20.0.0 range, such as 10.20.0.9, I add the reservation, hit apply, everything reloads, and the reservation has been changed to show 10.20.1.9 instead.

I tested this with multiple devices and ip's, and every time, YazDHCP changes the reservation to x.x.1.x from x.x.0.x. I tried modifying and importing csv file, but it still forced the change.

Best guess without looking at the code is that YazDHCP is doing some sort of logic checking that ignores the subnet mask and ignores all but the 4th octet. Probably a simple fix, I can do a PR and fix it some time this week if you can't get to it, depending on how simple a fix it is thanks!


tech

 

[Jack Yaz]

I encountered a bug with YazDHCP on 386.2, on a RT-AC58U. I skimmed the thread but didn't see it mentioned.

YazDHCP seems to expect a /24 netmask. My network uses 10.20.0.0/23. My dhcp server is set to assign ip addresses from 10.20.1.100-199. the server is at 10.20.1.1. when I try to assign a reservation to device using the lower 10.20.0.0 range, such as 10.20.0.9, I add the reservation, hit apply, everything reloads, and the reservation has been changed to show 10.20.1.9 instead.

I tested this with multiple devices and ip's, and every time, YazDHCP changes the reservation to x.x.1.x from x.x.0.x. I tried modifying and importing csv file, but it still forced the change.

Best guess without looking at the code is that YazDHCP is doing some sort of logic checking that ignores the subnet mask and ignores all but the 4th octet. Probably a simple fix, I can do a PR and fix it some time this week if you can't get to it, depending on how simple a fix it is thanks!


tech

does the stock firmware page allow for a subnet greating than 254 addresses (/24 netmask)
a lot of the firmware is hardcoded to /24 (e.g. network map) so i tend to avoid going beyond that, and as such i don't test those cases

EDIT: the issue will be with the space saving code, which as you've noted, strips the first 3 octets. you'll get less reservations by having a larger subnet due to the size limit on the custom_settings file used for passing settings from the webui to storage

 

[Torson]

Wouldn't it be easier to have Jack be less prolific with the scripts than trying to do all that hard evolution stuff?

Is that an insiders' joke? I really miss the point here. Is there any common sense or forum oversight?

 

[technotic]

does the stock firmware page allow for a subnet greating than 254 addresses (/24 netmask)
a lot of the firmware is hardcoded to /24 (e.g. network map) so i tend to avoid going beyond that, and as such i don't test those cases

EDIT: the issue will be with the space saving code, which as you've noted, strips the first 3 octets. you'll get less reservations by having a larger subnet due to the size limit on the custom_settings file used for passing settings from the webui to storage

Last I checked, it does. I use a /23 because I use both /24s for different purposes, but I like having them in the same mask by default instead of creating routing rules that sometimes get dicked up. Flashing merlin is part of my router setup these days so I don't recall on stock, but unless merlin changed the default dhcp server/lan config, a /23 is supported natively. By going back to nvram reservation storages, my reservations on x.x.0.x store and work properly. I haven't tried making the pool larger than a /24 though. I only have a 100 ip pool, x.x.1.100 to x.x.1.199. I use the x.x.0.x mostly for "servers" such as my nuc running libvirt, each of my vm's like home assistant and octopi, my rpi, and a couple other things. I have no more than 50 devices connected currently, but I like wasting private ip space I guess I like YazDHCP's import/export, which is why I wanted to use it. If it's such a limited use case and would cripple reservation limit for people, I can always fork it, make the changes, and maintain it myself. Don't want to put extra burden on you for the project.

 

[technotic]

Though it might be moot, I've been thinking about building my own merlin with full dnsmasq, or at least making the firmware use the full version from entware. I do like the webui simplicity tho.

 

[technotic]

does the stock firmware page allow for a subnet greating than 254 addresses (/24 netmask)
a lot of the firmware is hardcoded to /24 (e.g. network map) so i tend to avoid going beyond that, and as such i don't test those cases

EDIT: the issue will be with the space saving code, which as you've noted, strips the first 3 octets. you'll get less reservations by having a larger subnet due to the size limit on the custom_settings file used for passing settings from the webui to storage

Also, in regards to the stripping, I suppose that could be addressed by doing real bit masking using the netmask, but that might overcomplicate things, especially for such a limited use case. That would dynamically adjust the max based on the netmask.

I did want to report it though and if it would be too restrictive for the general release, I totally understand. It wouldn't be the first time I've been told to "fork off" lol

 

[Jack Yaz]

Also, in regards to the stripping, I suppose that could be addressed by doing real bit masking using the netmask, but that might overcomplicate things, especially for such a limited use case. That would dynamically adjust the max based on the netmask.

I did want to report it though and if it would be too restrictive for the general release, I totally understand. It wouldn't be the first time I've been told to "fork off" lol

Dynamic adjustment of how many octets to strip would be how I implement this. I'll see what I can do when I get back to YazDHCP

 

[Volkis]

Might there be a future enhancement to allow reservations of YaZFi subnet devices to be added? (via router's gui)

Presume that manual editing of YazDHCP files would be OK, though edits might lost after using GUI.

=========

Update...

Worse than I thought. Rather than simply "losing" the manually added entries, the non-default range IP addresses are changed to the "default" DHCP network address; e.g.

.staticlist

FF:FF:99:99:99:00,set:FF:FF:99:99:99:00,10.10.24.10​

becomes​

FF:FF:99:99:99:00,set:FF:FF:99:99:99:00,192.168.1.10​

DHCP_clients

FF:FF:99:99:99:00,10.10.24.10,my-device,​

becomes​

FF:FF:99:99:99:00,192.168.1.10,my-device,​

.hostnames

10.10.24.10 my-device​

becomes​

192.168.1.10 my-device​

=======

Once you manually edit these files, don't use the GUI

I've also tested to edit the reservations list and the reservations are visible in the GUI, I haven't try to edit or add using the GUI afterwards, but it doesn't seem to have an effect on clients on the other subnet where the devices connect over YazFi (they do get a random IP from specified subnet).
Could it be that the DHCP reservations in YazFi uses their own settings? Is there a possibility to make reservations for YazFi subnet in some way?

 

[Jack Yaz]

I've also tested to edit the reservations list and the reservations are visible in the GUI, I haven't try to edit or add using the GUI afterwards, but it doesn't seem to have an effect on clients on the other subnet where the devices connect over YazFi (they do get a random IP from specified subnet).
Could it be that the DHCP reservations in YazFi uses their own settings? Is there a possibility to make reservations for YazFi subnet in some way?

it'll be a YazFi feature if/when i get back to coding in the near future (dog had surgery yesterday to remove a lump, could be cancer, we find out next week)

 

[Volkis]

it'll be a YazFi feature if/when i get back to coding in the near future (dog had surgery yesterday to remove a lump, could be cancer, we find out next week)

I and my dog send our best wishes for a quick recovery.