dhcpcd-discuss

Re: timeout behavior different with dhcpcd 6.6.1

Roy Marples

Thu Nov 13 16:03:16 2014

On 13/11/2014 15:55, Amit Uttamchandani wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 03:50:41PM +0000, Roy Marples wrote:
>>> Thanks Roy. Unfortunately, we use the IPv4LL functionality. But it's ok,
>>> I will wait for your fix.
>>
>> OK, fair enough.
>> Tell me though, when the IPv4LL address was assigned with timeout 0, did
>> it get a lease assigned to the interface shortly afterwards?
>>
> 
> No, the address offered by the dhcp server was never assigned.

OK, that bug needs to be fixed.
If it was assigned would you be happy with it getting the IPv4LL address
first still?

> The
> interesting thing is, I think it took the IPv4LL address as the lease.
> This is because when I took a hex dump of
> /var/lib/dhcpcd5/dhcpcd-eth0.lease, the address in there is the IPv4LL
> lease.

That's not a bug :)
dhcpcd creates a fake DHCP lease so it fits in with the rest of the
code. We can tell it's fake because there is no magic DHCP cookie in the
lease.

Roy

Follow-Ups:
Re: timeout behavior different with dhcpcd 6.6.1Amit Uttamchandani
References:
timeout behavior different with dhcpcd 6.6.1Amit Uttamchandani
Re: timeout behavior different with dhcpcd 6.6.1Roy Marples
Re: timeout behavior different with dhcpcd 6.6.1Amit Uttamchandani
Re: timeout behavior different with dhcpcd 6.6.1Roy Marples
Re: timeout behavior different with dhcpcd 6.6.1Amit Uttamchandani
Archive administrator: postmaster@marples.name