$50 for tftp-server-name DHCP option



  • We are setting up a remote office with a router running pfsense beta 3.  One important feature that we are currently using in our ipcop routers is the ability to set the tftp-server-name option in DHCP so that our IP phones automatically provision themselves by downloading an XML file from the tftp server that is in the DHCP offer.  This is pretty important to us because it makes it a lot easier to reprovision phones in offices that don’t have any technical people.  Since we noticed that some configuration settings can be set manually in the pfsense XML configuration (such as next-server), we figured it would not be too hard to add this option as well.  I am posting a $50 bounty for this feature, since we are only going to be here for a few days and don’t have time to develop it ourselves.

    Please send solutions to carl at youngbloods dot org.  I will paypal the bounty to the first successful implementor.

    Thanks,
    Carl



  • Sent private email on this (not that this should discourage anyone else ;-P)

    –Bill



  • how about a more generic dhcp option#->value field?



  • @robbyt:

    how about a more generic dhcp option#->value field?

    No thanks.  It won’t be used very often and we are not going to start cluttering the interface with this stuff for 1% usage.



  • @sullrich:

    @robbyt:

    how about a more generic dhcp option#->value field?

    No thanks.  It won’t be used very often and we are not going to start cluttering the interface with this stuff for 1% usage.

    As it is, this will likely only go in as a hidden config.xml option anyway.  I’ll consider making it an array value that allows arbitrary dhcp options.  Maybe some day we’ll figure out a compromise between the advanced features and the normal features that won’t require editing config.xml - for now, that’s the only real option.  Needless to say, this isn’t going in 1.0 regardless of how it’s implemented.

    –Bill



  • @sullrich:

    @robbyt:

    how about a more generic dhcp option#->value field?

    No thanks.  It won’t be used very often and we are not going to start cluttering the interface with this stuff for 1% usage.

    i can understand, and in someways agree with you. But you should perhaps re-examine the this. For example, at my office- i run an asterisk server with about 60-70 polycom phones. The latest polycom firmware lets you specify the sip server as a dhcp option. (i think it’s like option# 165 or something like that)  You can push out all sorts of other wonderful and usefull stuff from dhcp: static routes, wins, ntp, and so on…

    I can understand not having this ability due to complexity of implimentation, but this seems like a fairly trivial thing (other then interface bloat)

    (attached is a screenshot from ipcop’s dhcp server options)





  • This bounty has been claimed by Daniel S. Haischt, who sent us some patched files, from which we were able to create a modification with a more minimal impact.

    To add this feature, mount the filesystem in a writeable mode (if not already) with:

    
    mount -w /
    
    

    and then add the following code to /etc/inc/services.inc, starting at line 238:

    
    if ($dhcpifconf['tftp-server-name'])
        $dhcpdconf .= " option tftp-server-name \"{#dhcpifconf['tftp-server-name']}\";\n";
    
    

    Then just change your config.xml and add

    
    <tftp-server-name>X.X.X.X</tftp-server-name>
    
    

    under pfsense/dhcpd/lan. That should do it.

    I agree with robbyt that adding the ability to set DHCP options is a common thing that is not supporting a 5% minority but actually would be used by a lot of people, and the changes to the interface would be minimal.

    Best wishes,
    Carl



  • This has been commited to -HEAD.

    Thanks!



  • If you want I can post the GUI related mods that I did to services_dhcp.php as well.

    Regards
    Daniel S. Haischt



  • @cayblood:

    This bounty has been claimed by Daniel S. Haischt, who sent us some patched files, from which we were able to create a modification with a more minimal impact.

    To add this feature, mount the filesystem in a writeable mode (if not already) with:

    
    mount -w /
    
    

    and then add the following code to /etc/inc/services.inc, starting at line 238:

    
    if ($dhcpifconf['tftp-server-name'])
        $dhcpdconf .= " option tftp-server-name \"{#dhcpifconf['tftp-server-name']}\";\n";
    
    

    Then just change your config.xml and add

    
    <tftp-server-name>X.X.X.X</tftp-server-name>
    
    

    under pfsense/dhcpd/lan. That should do it.

    I agree with robbyt that adding the ability to set DHCP options is a common thing that is not supporting a 5% minority but actually would be used by a lot of people, and the changes to the interface would be minimal.

    Best wishes,
    Carl

    fwiw, the better patch would have been something along the lines of:

    
    foreach($dhcpifconf['options'] as $optname => $dhcpopt) {
    	$dhcpdconf .= " option {$optname} \"{$dhcpopt}\";\n";
    }
    
    

    and then added

    
     <options><tftp-server-name>foobar</tftp-server-name></options> 
    
    

    to config.xml in the same place.  If someone creates a diff (that has been tested) with the above code concept, I’ll commit it to HEAD (and only HEAD).

    –Bill



  • or nm…the previous code was commited.  thus ends my interest in this. 🙂

    –Bill



  • Is this going to be in the next GUI too?



  • @sullrich:

    @robbyt:

    how about a more generic dhcp option#->value field?

    No thanks.  It won’t be used very often and we are not going to start cluttering the interface with this stuff for 1% usage.

    With this said it most probably will remain a hidden xml option.



  • I think many many people would use a feature such as this.  IP phones are becoming more and more popular and the easiest way to configure a network of them is with the tftp DHCP option.  I know this option would be used more than some of the other more specialized options that are already in pfsense.  I truely hope more people voice their need for this feature and you reconsider adding it to the gui.



  • @keefe007:

    I think many many people would use a feature such as this.  IP phones are becoming more and more popular and the easiest way to configure a network of them is with the tftp DHCP option.  I know this option would be used more than some of the other more specialized options that are already in pfsense.  I truely hope more people voice their need for this feature and you reconsider adding it to the gui.

    I’ll meet you half way.  You do the GUI work and I’ll commit.



  • The attached diff (against CVS HEAD) contains some GUI related mods as requested by keefe007.

    services_dhcp.php.txt



  • 0KB



  • @sullrich:

    0KB

    Yep, unfortunatly 😞

    services_dhcp.php.txt



  • As an installer of Asterisk PBX systems, the ability to push different DHCP options such as boot server, NTP server, and time offset, are absolute requirements in choosing a firewall/DHCP server. Without means of providing this function to DHCP clients such as IP phones, the usefullness of PFSense is greatly diminished. Its ok for now to be able to add them to a config file but a long term solution to provide this functionality is crucial to the success of PFSense within the IP PBX market.

    -Kerry



  • @kerryg:

    As an installer of Asterisk PBX systems, the ability to push different DHCP options such as boot server, NTP server, and time offset, are absolute requirements in choosing a firewall/DHCP server. Without means of providing this function to DHCP clients such as IP phones, the usefullness of PFSense is greatly diminished. Its ok for now to be able to add them to a config file but a long term solution to provide this functionality is crucial to the success of PFSense within the IP PBX market.

    -Kerry

    agree 100%!
    for asterisk support alone, a more flexible DHCP server is a killer feature.

    DHCP server interface works really well in IPCOP, better then any other i’ve seen.



  • I agree with the last two posts  🙂



  • Weird thought, make it available as a advanced option and hide it behind a advanced button.

    That appears to work really well for current code in RELENG_1



  • Was there ever a final resolution on this? If so, what is the proper format for the config.xml & services.inc file. I tried all the variations I could find, none seemed to work with my cisco phones.



  • I would like to claim the bounty.

    It’s added to both RELENG_1 and HEAD.

    It should be on the services_dhcp.php page.

    It will be hidden behind a “advanced” button.
    seth.mos@xs4all.nl for paypal



  • Hello,

    I just completed a search for “option 66” to see if PFSense supported it and came upon this post.

    I too would use this for an Asterisk system.

    What is the status of this initiative ? Is anyone else looking for this ? Is anyone using this now ?

    TIA.



  • @sullrich:

    This has been commited to -HEAD.

    I’m still a little unsure of your release processes, when will a commit to HEAD (from May 2006) make it into a snapshot, or an actual release?

    I had a look in the code from 1.2-BETA-1-TESTING-SNAPSHOT-06-04-2007 but its not in there.

    Regards

    Ben



  • AFAIK, there is no set schedule for HEAD features getting into release.
    However, it should have hit RELENG_1. Perhaps no one ponied up the bounty…
    @databeestje:

    I would like to claim the bounty.

    It’s added to both RELENG_1 and HEAD.

    It should be on the services_dhcp.php page.

    It will be hidden behind a “advanced” button.
    seth.mos@xs4all.nl for paypal



  • @dotdash:

    AFAIK, there is no set schedule for HEAD features getting into release.
    However, it should have hit RELENG_1. Perhaps no one ponied up the bounty…

    That bit by databeestje confused me a bit because the bounty had already been claimed previously :

    @cayblood:

    This bounty has been claimed by Daniel S. Haischt, who sent us some patched files, from which we were able to create a modification with a more minimal impact.

    Regards

    Ben



  • My understanding was that DSH was no longer coding for the project. See here:
    http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,2824.msg22987.html#msg22987
    I think that’s why Seth was completing the work.



  • @dotdash:

    My understanding was that DSH was no longer coding for the project. See here:
    http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,2824.msg22987.html#msg22987
    I think that’s why Seth was completing the work.

    @dotdash
    Don’t spread false rumors. And yes the bounty was already claimed and I am not sure whether the bounty author is willing to pay twice.

    Cheers
    Daniel S. Haischt



  • Sorry, meant no offense. Was just trying to figure out where this went, as the thread is a bit confusing. It says it was added to release, but doesn’t appear in recent snapshots. I was just speculating as to why it looked like there had been multiple people working on this. Again, sorry that my wild speculation was off-base.
    Re-reading it does say clearly that the bounty was claimed and the changes were added to head.


Locked
 

© Copyright 2002 - 2018 Rubicon Communications, LLC | Privacy Policy