dhcpcd-discuss

On 07/09/2018 20:00, Andrey Vakhitov wrote:
> thank you very much for your fast response. I got the latest version and
> applied your patch.
> First tests show that it works as expected.
>
> > dhcpcd *is* doing the right thing here.
> > See here:
> > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg/current/msg08453.html
>
> > If a server wants to renumber the delegated prefix, they can send the old
> prefix with a zero lifetime and > the new prefix with a positive lifetime in
> the same iaid.
>
> > What they shouldn't do is lease a prefix for N seconds and then deny it
> sooner when renumbering - but > this appears to be exactly what it's doing.
>
> > I've created the attached patch to enter discover if any reply is invalid,
> rather than if it's invalid and it's
> > a rebind and it's delegated. I'm sure if this is the right thing to do
> just yet, but it should fix your
> > immediate problem.
>
> Thanks a lot for the explanation as well. I share your opinion that my
> upstream router (fritz) has buggy implementation of dhcp server, it's not
> the first bug you discover ;-) But those routers are quite popular in
> Germany (it's more-or-less the default choice, ISPs are bundling it with DSL
> contracts), so I think there are a couple of people affected by this bug as
> well. Do you plan to provide this or comparable solution in the master
> branch (mainstream version) as well? At least controllable by some option
> parameter?

Might be worth firing them off an email asking them how the router 
expects renumbering to happen or if it's a bug with their firmware.

> I'll monitor your patch overnight to be totally sure.

Great.

If the patch works out after a few days I'll probably just commit it as 
is. I can't think of any workarounds right now.
The old leased address should expire eventually so there's no harm there 
and the new one should take priority.

Roy