[Starlingx-discuss] DHCP Related Patches
sgw at linux.intel.com
Fri Oct 5 21:40:10 UTC 2018
On 10/04/2018 04:51 PM, Penney, Don wrote:
> Here's the original commit message for dhclient-restrict-interfaces-to-command-line.patch. There was an issue with leases expiring, causing interfaces to lose their IP addresses, which in turn caused various issues due to the loss of comms:
> Author: Allain Legacy <allain.legacy at windriver.com>
> Date: Tue Jan 5 14:36:47 2016 -0500
> dhclient: restrict interfaces to those on command line only
> By default, the dhclient process does not respect the list of interfaces
> supplied at the command line. It configures any interfaces found to be
> specified in the config file. Since we customize options for each interface in
> our config file and run a separate dhclient process for each interface we end
> up with multiple dhclient processes that each service all interfaces. This is
> undesirable because it is possible that a request is sent by process A but
> received by process B. This leads to lease expiry events even though a valid
> request packet was returned by the server.
So, a further question is why is the default behavior of having 1
process managing all the interfaces a bad thing? What problem were you
trying to solve? Again, the WHY behind the original change not just
that dhclient has a undesirable behavior. Why is there a
> This change introduces a "--restrict-interfaces" option to the dhclient process
> to force it to ignore all interfaces in config files other than those specified
> at the command line.
> To activate this change our busybox version of ifup/ifdown has been modified to
> pass the "--restrict-interfaces" to dhclient as well as to request that each
> process use its own lease file to avoid file corruption.
I think this dates to the OE version, as Centos does not have busybox,
but the changes are in initscripts.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Saul Wold [mailto:sgw at linux.intel.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2018 6:02 PM
> To: Rowsell, Brent; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
> Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] DHCP Related Patches
> HI Brent,
> There are currently 6 DHCP related patches specifically to the client code.
> We have already determined that 2 of those patches the NSUPDATE
> protection could be removed, 2 seem to be StarlingX spceific but
> replaced with a enter-hook scripts provided in another patch. 1 is a
> - Remove these 2
> - Can these be removed as the functionality is now added via the
> dhclient-enter-hooks script?
> - This is a backport, which will be available when CentOS updates to
> the newer version.
> - Can this be moved to the dhclient-enter-hooks?
> - This seems to be adding functionality, in order to restrict the
> dhclient to only be active on one interface. There is no commit message
> for this one, or is there a way to refactor this? Is this a bug in
> dhclient? Was it ever filled or commented on in the DHCP mailing list?
> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
More information about the Starlingx-discuss