dhcpcd-discuss

One small update.  I'm not sure if this is expected behavior, as while
reading the man page, I did notice that it says dhcpcd has to be running
for an interface to delegate a prefix to it.

I had to add an explicit 'disable' section for my lan0 interface.  Without
that section, dhcpcd was leasing an address on my LAN (granted by dhcpd
running on the same system), which itself wasn't a huge problem, but for
some reason it would fail to renew, and after failing to renew, dhcpcd
deleted the route to 10.0.0.0/24, which had been statically assigned before
dhcpcd leased a 10.0.0.x address, causing the router to drop offline.  I
fixed this by adding these lines to my config:

interface lan0
nodhcp
nodhcp6
noipv4ll


I then did some tweaking and figured out how to request a larger prefix,
and then delegate two different /64s to my two separate LANs, so I had to
add another section of the above for my second lan:

interface dmz0
nodhcp
nodhcp6
noipv4ll

Based on the 'dhcpcd must be running for an interface in order to delegate
to it' part of the man page, I think this is expected, and I will just keep
that in my config, but in case it isn't (since it seems to be a behavior
change since 6.11.3, where I did not need that interface section for my LAN
interface), I wanted to report it.

Nathan

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 10:01 AM Nathan O'Meara <araemo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> It appears that dhcpcd-9999 fully passed my test.  Initial startup looked
> fully correct.  I power cycled the modem and it was able to re-acquire both
> an ivp4 and ipv6 address, and the default ipv6 route looks correct.  I
> never saw the ipv6 route get removed on 'watch -n 1 route -6n', so I'm not
> sure if that's correct, but it appears to be functioning.  I do see the
> 'adding route to <ipv6prefix>' in the log during re-bind though, which I
> didn't under 6.11.3.  7.0.0-rc1 had something weird going on that tried to
> renew on all my interfaces, and I think that was actually causing the v6
> problem on rebind.  9999 didn't do the same.
>
> As a final test, I manually deleted the v6 default route while my modem
> was off.  when it turned back on, dhcpcd-9999 got both v4 and v6 leases
> correctly, and set up the default routes correctly.
>
> Thank you for the help,
> I'll watch for the next 7.0.0 release and re-test on that.  Enjoy Spain.
>
> Nathan
>
>
> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 9:39 AM Roy Marples <roy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On 27/05/2017 14:36, Nathan O'Meara wrote:
>> > I just tried 7.0.0-rc1, and while it works similarly on first bind, I
>> > did notice that it seems to be trying to get DHCP leases on all
>> > adapters, not only the one listed in the config.  It also seemed to fail
>> > to rebind the ipv6 address at all after I power cycled the modem.. about
>> > to try 9999.
>>
>> I don't expect any to pass the renew or rebind, that seems an issue with
>> your upstream.
>> We can analyse tcpdumps to work out more.
>>
>> We are only concerned about the correctness of the routes being applied
>> after getting a new lease.
>>
>> Roy
>>
>