Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

DHCP6: lastlease behavior after Confim non-response #387

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
+2 −1
Open

DHCP6: lastlease behavior after Confim non-response #387

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
6137c44
DHCP6: lastlease behavior after Confim non-response
Oct 16, 2024
e7370f8
Merge branch 'NetworkConfiguration:master' into lastlease3
jvfranklin Oct 17, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 2 additions & 1 deletion src/dhcp6.c
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1760,8 +1760,9 @@ dhcp6_fail(struct interface *ifp, bool drop)
dhcp_unlink(ifp->ctx, state->leasefile);
dhcp6_addrequestedaddrs(ifp);
eloop_timeout_delete(ifp->ctx->eloop, NULL, ifp);
} else if (state->recv && ifp->options->options & DHCPCD_LASTLEASE) {
} else if (state->state == DH6S_CONFIRM && ifp->options->options & DHCPCD_LASTLEASE) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we also allow the state DH6S_REBIND please?
IF you ask for a Prefix Delegation you REBIND, otherwise CONFIRM and ideally we want the behavior in both states.
And we should still check state->recv to ensure we ARE using the last lease in this state.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure, I'm not seeing any issues with those changes in my own testing.

dhcp6_bind(ifp, NULL, NULL);
return;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why return?

We couldn't find any DHCPv6 server, so we do use the last lease, but we should retry and DISCOVER yes?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Soliciting for a lease while using the current one could lead to problems if the DHCPv6 server has ping checking enabled, in the case where you come back up on the same network. We've seen it fail the ping check (ie, gets a response) and issue a new IP address when that happens, thinking there's an address conflict. I think making this behavior optional with the lastlease option allows everybody to choose which way they want to go, since it is kind of a couple of competing requirements we're trying to untangle here. What do you think?

} else if (state->new) {
script_runreason(ifp, "TIMEOUT6");
// We need to keep the expire timeout alive
Expand Down
Loading