wide-dhcpv6-developers Mailing List for WIDE-DHCPv6 (Page 2)
Brought to you by:
suzsuz
You can subscribe to this list here.
2006 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(21) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(5) |
Dec
(8) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2007 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(3) |
Apr
(3) |
May
(5) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(1) |
2008 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
(8) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(3) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2012 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
2013 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2014 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(3) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
(1) |
2019 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
From: <Hid...@jp...> - 2007-05-23 08:17:24
|
Hello developers, Do you have any plans to support Confirm/Decline message in both WIDE-DHCPv6 Client and Server? If you have any plans, could you let me know, please? regards, |
From: <Hid...@jp...> - 2007-05-07 23:30:01
|
Hello Suzuki-san, Thank you for your cooperation! Best regards,=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: SUZUKI Shinsuke [mailto:su...@us...]=20 > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 5:18 PM > To: Enokihara, Hideshi (Hid...@jp...) > Cc: wid...@li... > Subject: Re: [Wide-dhcpv6-developers] [BULK] Re: tiny bug in=20 > Relay Agent >=20 > Hello all, >=20 > >>>>> On Mon, 7 May 2007 14:06:48 +0900 > >>>>> <Hid...@jp...> said: >=20 > > I'm planning to use the WIDE-DHCPv6 Relay Agent in the TAHI event. > > At the time, it is required to use a release or snap version of > > WIDE-DHCPv6 to distinguish the version. > > Could you make a release version or snap version of=20 > WIDE-DHCPv6, please? >=20 > wide-dhcpv6-20070507.tar.gz has just been released. >=20 > Thanks, > ---- > SUZUKI, Shinsuke @ KAME Project >=20 >=20 |
From: SUZUKI S. <su...@us...> - 2007-05-07 08:17:51
|
Hello all, >>>>> On Mon, 7 May 2007 14:06:48 +0900 >>>>> <Hid...@jp...> said: > I'm planning to use the WIDE-DHCPv6 Relay Agent in the TAHI event. > At the time, it is required to use a release or snap version of > WIDE-DHCPv6 to distinguish the version. > Could you make a release version or snap version of WIDE-DHCPv6, please? wide-dhcpv6-20070507.tar.gz has just been released. Thanks, ---- SUZUKI, Shinsuke @ KAME Project |
From: <Hid...@jp...> - 2007-05-07 05:07:17
|
Hello SUZUKI-san, Thank you so much for your handling of this. And I have one more request to you (I'm sorry to bother you). I'm planning to use the WIDE-DHCPv6 Relay Agent in the TAHI event. At the time, it is required to use a release or snap version of WIDE-DHCPv6 to distinguish the version. Could you make a release version or snap version of WIDE-DHCPv6, please? Thank you for your cooperation! Best regards, =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: SUZUKI Shinsuke [mailto:su...@us...]=20 > Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 4:18 PM > To: Enokihara, Hideshi (Hid...@jp...) > Cc: wid...@li... > Subject: [BULK] Re: [Wide-dhcpv6-developers] tiny bug in Relay Agent > Importance: Low >=20 > Hi, >=20 > I've just commited the fix to the following bug (dhcp6relay.c=20 > Rev 1.9). > (And I confirmed dhcp6relay passes all the tests in IPv6 Ready Logo > Ph.2 for DHCPv6!) >=20 > =09 > >>>>> On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:26:05 +0900=20 > >>>>> <Hid...@jp...> said: >=20 > > Hello all, > >=20 > > I found a tiny bug in Relay Agent. > >=20 > > The network topology like as following. > >=20 > > TN(Client1) > > | > > Link2 > > -------------+----------+---------------------3ffe:501:ffff:102::/64 > > | =20 > > | =20 > > TN(Relay2) > > | =20 > > | =20 > > Link1 -------------+-----------------------+-------- > > 3ffe:501:ffff:101::/64 > > | > > | > > NUT(Relay1) > > | > > | Link0=20 > > ------------------------+------------+-------- > > 3ffe:501:ffff:100::/64 > > | > > TN(Server1) > >=20 > > NUT(Relya1) is WIDE-DHCPv6. > > When the NUT receive a Relay-Reply Advertise message, the=20 > NUT relays=20 > > this message with invalid dst port number(546). > > The dst port number should be 567, I think. > >=20 > > You can find more detailed information in=20 > >=20 > http://www.tahi.org/logo/dhcpv6/result/DHCPv6_Self_Test_P2_1_0_0b1_rel > > ay > > /rfc3315/index.html > >=20 > > No. 16 is the case.=20 > >=20 > http://www.tahi.org/logo/dhcpv6/result/DHCPv6_Self_Test_P2_1_0_0b1_rel > > ay > > /rfc3315/16.html > >=20 > > Best regards, > > ...Hideshi > >=20 > >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > --- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join=20 > > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share=20 > > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief=20 > surveys-and earn=20 > > cash=20 > >=20 > = http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D= DEV > > DEV _______________________________________________ > > Wide-dhcpv6-developers mailing list > > Wid...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wide-dhcpv6-developers > >=20 >=20 |
From: SUZUKI S. <su...@us...> - 2007-05-03 07:17:54
|
Hi, I've just commited the fix to the following bug (dhcp6relay.c Rev 1.9). (And I confirmed dhcp6relay passes all the tests in IPv6 Ready Logo Ph.2 for DHCPv6!) >>>>> On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:26:05 +0900 >>>>> <Hid...@jp...> said: > Hello all, > > I found a tiny bug in Relay Agent. > > The network topology like as following. > > TN(Client1) > | > Link2 > -------------+----------+---------------------3ffe:501:ffff:102::/64 > | > | > TN(Relay2) > | > | > Link1 -------------+-----------------------+-------- > 3ffe:501:ffff:101::/64 > | > | > NUT(Relay1) > | > | > Link0 ------------------------+------------+-------- > 3ffe:501:ffff:100::/64 > | > TN(Server1) > > NUT(Relya1) is WIDE-DHCPv6. > When the NUT receive a Relay-Reply Advertise message, the NUT relays > this message with invalid dst port number(546). > The dst port number should be 567, I think. > > You can find more detailed information in > http://www.tahi.org/logo/dhcpv6/result/DHCPv6_Self_Test_P2_1_0_0b1_relay > /rfc3315/index.html > > No. 16 is the case. > http://www.tahi.org/logo/dhcpv6/result/DHCPv6_Self_Test_P2_1_0_0b1_relay > /rfc3315/16.html > > Best regards, > ...Hideshi > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > _______________________________________________ > Wide-dhcpv6-developers mailing list > Wid...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wide-dhcpv6-developers > |
From: <Hid...@jp...> - 2007-04-16 00:21:51
|
Hello JINMEI-san, Yes, I mean 547. I'm sorry for making you confused. Best regards, ...Hideshi > -----Original Message----- > From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 [mailto:ji...@is...] > Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2007 3:17 PM > To: Enokihara, Hideshi (Hid...@jp...) > Cc: wid...@li... > Subject: Re: [Wide-dhcpv6-developers] tiny bug in Relay Agent > > At Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:26:05 +0900, > <Hid...@jp...> wrote: > > > NUT(Relya1) is WIDE-DHCPv6. > > When the NUT receive a Relay-Reply Advertise message, the > NUT relays > > this message with invalid dst port number(546). > > The dst port number should be 567, I think. > > Don't you mean 547 rather than 567? > > JINMEI, Tatuya > Communication Platform Lab. > Corporate R&D Center, > Toshiba Corp. > ji...@is... > |
From: JINMEI T. /
<ji...@is...> - 2007-04-14 06:16:59
|
At Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:26:05 +0900, <Hid...@jp...> wrote: > NUT(Relya1) is WIDE-DHCPv6. > When the NUT receive a Relay-Reply Advertise message, the NUT relays > this message with invalid dst port number(546). > The dst port number should be 567, I think. Don't you mean 547 rather than 567? JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. ji...@is... |
From: <Hid...@jp...> - 2007-04-13 11:26:12
|
Hello all, I found a tiny bug in Relay Agent. The network topology like as following. TN(Client1) | Link2 -------------+----------+---------------------3ffe:501:ffff:102::/64 | =20 | =20 TN(Relay2) | =20 | =20 Link1 -------------+-----------------------+-------- 3ffe:501:ffff:101::/64 | | NUT(Relay1) | | Link0 ------------------------+------------+-------- 3ffe:501:ffff:100::/64 | TN(Server1) NUT(Relya1) is WIDE-DHCPv6. When the NUT receive a Relay-Reply Advertise message, the NUT relays this message with invalid dst port number(546). The dst port number should be 567, I think. You can find more detailed information in http://www.tahi.org/logo/dhcpv6/result/DHCPv6_Self_Test_P2_1_0_0b1_relay /rfc3315/index.html No. 16 is the case.=20 http://www.tahi.org/logo/dhcpv6/result/DHCPv6_Self_Test_P2_1_0_0b1_relay /rfc3315/16.html Best regards, ...Hideshi |
From: <Hid...@jp...> - 2007-03-02 00:58:46
|
Thank you for your response. You gave me the hints! I mistook the direction(upstream and downstream) of Confirm message transmission. dhcp6relay works well! Best regards, ... Hideshi Enokihara > -----Original Message----- > From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 [mailto:ji...@is...] > Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 8:37 PM > To: Enokihara, Hideshi (Hid...@jp...) > Cc: wid...@li... > Subject: Re: [Wide-dhcpv6-developers] what kind of message > can the dhcp6relay relay? > > >>>>> On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 20:02:25 +0900, > >>>>> <Hid...@jp...> said: > > > I'd like to know what kind of message the dhcp6relay can relay. > > Is it possible to relay all message type? like Confirm, > Renew, Rebind, > > Release and Decline. > > It should be. > > > I have some problem regarding Confirm message relaying. > > dhcp6relay can not relay a Confirm message in my environment. > > Could you provide more detailed information, please? Network > topology diagram, logging output by the -D command line > option and packet dump on the downstream and upstream links > would be useful. > > JINMEI, Tatuya > Communication Platform Lab. > Corporate R&D Center, > Toshiba Corp. > ji...@is... > |
From: JINMEI T. /
<ji...@is...> - 2007-03-01 11:37:39
|
>>>>> On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 20:02:25 +0900, >>>>> <Hid...@jp...> said: > I'd like to know what kind of message the dhcp6relay can relay. > Is it possible to relay all message type? like Confirm, Renew, Rebind, > Release and Decline. It should be. > I have some problem regarding Confirm message relaying. > dhcp6relay can not relay a Confirm message in my environment. Could you provide more detailed information, please? Network topology diagram, logging output by the -D command line option and packet dump on the downstream and upstream links would be useful. JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. ji...@is... |
From: <Hid...@jp...> - 2007-03-01 11:02:32
|
Hello all, I'm using wide-dhcpv6 20061016 released. I'd like to know what kind of message the dhcp6relay can relay. Is it possible to relay all message type? like Confirm, Renew, Rebind, Release and Decline. I have some problem regarding Confirm message relaying. dhcp6relay can not relay a Confirm message in my environment. I'm waitin for your help. Best regards, ...Hideshi Enokihara |
From: SUZUKI S. <su...@us...> - 2006-12-11 05:18:42
|
Hello, >>> At Wed, 06 Dec 2006 13:12:10 +0900 >>> so...@ii...(Sogabe Takashi) said: > - dhcp6c.conf > interface ppp0 { > request domain-name-servers; > }; > - command_line > # dhcp6c -i ppp0 > Pattern B; PC1 don't send "option request DNS", so PC2 don't send > dns-servers. Please invoke dhcp6c without the "-i" option. Right now, dhcp6c with the "-i" option does not generate an info-req message with Option-Request Option. (Ideally, an info-req message should include an Option-Request Option for all the possible options in such a case, though...) Thanks, ---- SUZUKI, Shinsuke |
From: SUZUKI S. <su...@us...> - 2006-12-11 05:12:21
|
Hello, >>>>> On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 11:10:42 -0500 >>>>> jam...@su...(James Carlson) said: > > But "-i" is provided as an equivalence to the following configuration > > (I wrote it in the dhcp6c configuration example available in > > sourceforge document-list, but I forgot to mention it in dhcp6c.8...). > > interface xxx { > > information-only; > > script "(just displays the received information to stdout)"; > > } > > > > So I don't think configuration check should not be done when "-i" > > option is provided. > > It's still not clear to me, as the information-only request won't work > when authentication is in use. Right. the "-i" option does not work with authentication, since '-i' is dedicated for a simple stateless-DHCPv6, and nothing more than that. So if you need authentication or ORO, you have to write an appropriate configuration and start dhcp6c without the "-i" option. Thanks, ---- SUZUKI, Shinsuke |
From: Sogabe T. <so...@ii...> - 2006-12-06 04:10:26
|
Hello Suzuki-san, The configuration is as follows: Pattern A -------+------+------ Ethernet | | PC1 PC2 PC1 - Ubuntu 6.10 - dhcp6c (wide-dhcpv6-20061016) - dhcp6c.conf interface eth0 { request domain-name-servers; }; - command_line # dhcp6c -i eth0 PC2 - Ubuntu 6.10 - dhcp6s (wide-dhcpv6-20061016) - dhcp6s.conf option domain-name-servers 2001:db8::35 2001:db8::36; interface eth1 { address-pool pool1 3600; }; pool pool1 { range 2001:db8:1:2::1000 to 2001:db8:1:2::2000 ; }; Pattern B RT2 | |PPPoE | PC1 PC1 - Ubuntu 6.10 - dhcp6c (wide-dhcpv6-20061016) - dhcp6c.conf interface ppp0 { request domain-name-servers; }; - command_line # dhcp6c -i ppp0 RT2 - yet another implementation.. Results: - Pattern A: OK - Pattern B: NG The result of Pattern A seems to be work correctly, but PC1 don't send "option request DNS". Pattern B; PC1 don't send "option request DNS", so PC2 don't send dns-servers. tcpdump-------- Pattern A root@ubuntu:~# tcpdump -n -i eth0 -x -vvv -s 1500 -p udp tcpdump: WARNING: eth0: no IPv4 address assigned tcpdump: listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 1500 bytes 10:23:32.224076 IP6 (hlim 64, next-header: UDP (17), length: 36) fe80::20c:29ff:fe63:1518.546 > ff02::1:2.547: [udp sum ok] dhcp6 inf-req (xid=d4df97 (client ID hwaddr/time type 1 time 218258637 000c299ab41e) (elapsed time 0)) 0x0000: 6000 0000 0024 1140 fe80 0000 0000 0000 0x0010: 020c 29ff fe63 1518 ff02 0000 0000 0000 0x0020: 0000 0000 0001 0002 0222 0223 0024 8b38 0x0030: 0bd4 df97 0001 000e 0001 0001 0d02 5ccd 0x0040: 000c 299a b41e 0008 0002 0000 10:23:32.229987 IP6 (hlim 64, next-header: UDP (17), length: 84) fe80::20c:29ff:fe3d:c72a.1024 > fe80::20c:29ff:fe63:1518.546: [udp sum ok] dhcp6 reply (xid=d4df97 (client ID hwaddr/time type 1 time 218258637 000c299ab41e) (server ID hwaddr/time type 1 time 218627080 000c29631518) (DNS 2001:db8::35 2001:db8::36)) 0x0000: 6000 0000 0054 1140 fe80 0000 0000 0000 0x0010: 020c 29ff fe3d c72a fe80 0000 0000 0000 0x0020: 020c 29ff fe63 1518 0400 0222 0054 f858 0x0030: 07d4 df97 0001 000e 0001 0001 0d02 5ccd 0x0040: 000c 299a b41e 0002 000e 0001 0001 0d07 0x0050: fc08 000c 2963 1518 0017 0020 2001 0db8 0x0060: 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0035 2001 0db8 0x0070: 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0036 Pattern B root@ubuntu:~# tcpdump -n -i ppp0 -x -vvv -s 1500 -p udp tcpdump: WARNING: ppp0: no IPv4 address assigned tcpdump: listening on ppp0, link-type LINUX_SLL (Linux cooked), capture size 1500 bytes 10:24:28.719459 IP6 (hlim 64, next-header: UDP (17), length: 36) fe80::903:2967:7458:4e11.546 > ff02::1:2.547: [udp sum ok] dhcp6 inf-req (xid=4176db (client ID hwaddr/time type 1 time 218258637 000c299ab41e) (elapsed time 0)) 0x0000: 6000 0000 0024 1140 fe80 0000 0000 0000 0x0010: 0903 2967 7458 4e11 ff02 0000 0000 0000 0x0020: 0000 0000 0001 0002 0222 0223 0024 3f3b 0x0030: 0b41 76db 0001 000e 0001 0001 0d02 5ccd 0x0040: 000c 299a b41e 0008 0002 0000 10:24:28.735793 IP6 (hlim 64, next-header: UDP (17), length: 44) fe80::2e0:4dff:fe0c:352.547 > fe80::903:2967:7458:4e11.546: [udp sum ok] dhcp6 reply (xid=4176db (server ID hwaddr type 1 00e04d0c0352) (client ID hwaddr/time type 1 time 218258637 000c299ab41e)) 0x0000: 6000 0000 002c 1140 fe80 0000 0000 0000 0x0010: 02e0 4dff fe0c 0352 fe80 0000 0000 0000 0x0020: 0903 2967 7458 4e11 0223 0222 002c a02d 0x0030: 0741 76db 0002 000a 0003 0001 00e0 4d0c 0x0040: 0352 0001 000e 0001 0001 0d02 5ccd 000c 0x0050: 299a b41e Pattern B(Patched version) 10:26:08.173217 IP6 (hlim 64, next-header: UDP (17), length: 42) fe80::903:2967:7458:4e11.546 > ff02::1:2.547: [udp sum ok] dhcp6 inf-req (xid=749c9f (client ID hwaddr/time type 1 time 218258637 000c299ab41e) (elapsed time 0) (option request DNS)) 0x0000: 6000 0000 002a 1140 fe80 0000 0000 0000 0x0010: 0903 2967 7458 4e11 ff02 0000 0000 0000 0x0020: 0000 0000 0001 0002 0222 0223 002a 1919 0x0030: 0b74 9c9f 0001 000e 0001 0001 0d02 5ccd 0x0040: 000c 299a b41e 0008 0002 0000 0006 0002 0x0050: 0017 10:26:08.192273 IP6 (hlim 64, next-header: UDP (17), length: 80) fe80::2e0:4dff:fe0c:352.547 > fe80::903:2967:7458:4e11.546: [udp sum ok] dhcp6 reply (xid=749c9f (server ID hwaddr type 1 00e04d0c0352) (client ID hwaddr/time type 1 time 218258637 000c299ab41e) (DNS 2001:db8::53 2001:db8::35)) 0x0000: 6000 0000 0050 1140 fe80 0000 0000 0000 0x0010: 02e0 4dff fe0c 0352 fe80 0000 0000 0000 0x0020: 0903 2967 7458 4e11 0223 0222 0050 1dbd 0x0030: 0774 9c9f 0002 000a 0003 0001 00e0 4d0c 0x0040: 0352 0001 000e 0001 0001 0d02 5ccd 000c 0x0050: 299a b41e 0017 0020 2001 0db8 0000 0000 0x0060: 0000 0000 0000 0053 2001 0db8 0000 0000 0x0070: 0000 0000 0000 0035 SUZUKI Shinsuke wrote: > Hello Sogabe-san, > > >>>>At Fri, 01 Dec 2006 20:14:39 +0900 >>>>so...@ii...(Sogabe Takashi) said: > > >>Currently dhcpv6c with -i option seems to work incorrectly. > > Could you please elaborate on how it didn't work "incorrectly"? > > (dhcp6c does not intentionally detect a configuration syntax error > when "-i" option is given, because "-i" option is provided to write a > configuration for stateless-DHCPv6) > > Thanks, > ---- > SUZUKI, Shinsuke |
From: James C. <jam...@su...> - 2006-12-04 16:10:26
|
SUZUKI Shinsuke writes: > Hi James, > > >>>>> On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 09:57:55 -0500 > >>>>> jam...@su...(James Carlson) said: > > > Shouldn't stateless DHCPv6 still be reading the configuration file in > > order to get configuration parameters, such as authentication? > > > > I thought "stateless" just meant that it didn't attempt to acquire > > address leases; not that it didn't use the configuration file. > > In general, you are right. > > But "-i" is provided as an equivalence to the following configuration > (I wrote it in the dhcp6c configuration example available in > sourceforge document-list, but I forgot to mention it in dhcp6c.8...). > interface xxx { > information-only; > script "(just displays the received information to stdout)"; > } > > So I don't think configuration check should not be done when "-i" > option is provided. It's still not clear to me, as the information-only request won't work when authentication is in use. But at least I now understand better what you're after here. > P.S.) > I've just started merging your patch little by little. > So wait a moment, please. Sure; thanks! -- James Carlson, KISS Network <jam...@su...> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 |
From: SUZUKI S. <su...@us...> - 2006-12-04 15:12:56
|
Hi James, >>>>> On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 09:57:55 -0500 >>>>> jam...@su...(James Carlson) said: > Shouldn't stateless DHCPv6 still be reading the configuration file in > order to get configuration parameters, such as authentication? > > I thought "stateless" just meant that it didn't attempt to acquire > address leases; not that it didn't use the configuration file. In general, you are right. But "-i" is provided as an equivalence to the following configuration (I wrote it in the dhcp6c configuration example available in sourceforge document-list, but I forgot to mention it in dhcp6c.8...). interface xxx { information-only; script "(just displays the received information to stdout)"; } So I don't think configuration check should not be done when "-i" option is provided. P.S.) I've just started merging your patch little by little. So wait a moment, please. Thanks, ---- SUZUKI, Shinsuke |
From: James C. <jam...@su...> - 2006-12-04 14:56:34
|
SUZUKI Shinsuke writes: > Hello Sogabe-san, > > >>> At Fri, 01 Dec 2006 20:14:39 +0900 > >>> so...@ii...(Sogabe Takashi) said: > > > Currently dhcpv6c with -i option seems to work incorrectly. > Could you please elaborate on how it didn't work "incorrectly"? > > (dhcp6c does not intentionally detect a configuration syntax error > when "-i" option is given, because "-i" option is provided to write a > configuration for stateless-DHCPv6) Shouldn't stateless DHCPv6 still be reading the configuration file in order to get configuration parameters, such as authentication? I thought "stateless" just meant that it didn't attempt to acquire address leases; not that it didn't use the configuration file. -- James Carlson, KISS Network <jam...@su...> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 |
From: SUZUKI S. <su...@us...> - 2006-12-04 14:44:04
|
Hello Sogabe-san, >>> At Fri, 01 Dec 2006 20:14:39 +0900 >>> so...@ii...(Sogabe Takashi) said: > Currently dhcpv6c with -i option seems to work incorrectly. Could you please elaborate on how it didn't work "incorrectly"? (dhcp6c does not intentionally detect a configuration syntax error when "-i" option is given, because "-i" option is provided to write a configuration for stateless-DHCPv6) Thanks, ---- SUZUKI, Shinsuke > I've applyed following patch and dhcpv6c works well. Please apply > it. > > > --- dhcp6c.c.orig 2006-12-01 15:53:12.000000000 +0900 > +++ dhcp6c.c 2006-12-01 17:47:21.000000000 +0900 > @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ > argv++; > } > > - if (infreq_mode == 0 && (cfparse(conffile)) != 0) { > + if ((cfparse(conffile)) != 0 && infreq_mode == 0) { > dprintf(LOG_ERR, FNAME, "failed to parse configuration file"); > exit(1); > } > > Regards, > > -- > Takashi Sogabe <so...@ii...> > Internet Initiative Jpanan Inc. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > _______________________________________________ > Wide-dhcpv6-developers mailing list > Wid...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wide-dhcpv6-developers > |
From: Sogabe T. <so...@ii...> - 2006-12-01 11:12:52
|
Hi all, Currently dhcpv6c with -i option seems to work incorrectly. I've applyed following patch and dhcpv6c works well. Please apply it. --- dhcp6c.c.orig 2006-12-01 15:53:12.000000000 +0900 +++ dhcp6c.c 2006-12-01 17:47:21.000000000 +0900 @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ argv++; } - if (infreq_mode == 0 && (cfparse(conffile)) != 0) { + if ((cfparse(conffile)) != 0 && infreq_mode == 0) { dprintf(LOG_ERR, FNAME, "failed to parse configuration file"); exit(1); } Regards, -- Takashi Sogabe <so...@ii...> Internet Initiative Jpanan Inc. |
From: James C. <jam...@su...> - 2006-11-25 04:57:41
|
I've ported the WIDE DHCPv6 server over to Solaris. The changes required were fairly minimal: - Solaris doesn't have getifaddrs(), daemon(), or the errx()/warnx() functions. A simple implementation of each (based on the man pages) was added to the "missing" subdirectory, along with supporting logic in configure.in and Makefile.in. - Solaris doesn't have <sys/queue.h>, which is really a BSD kernel header file. A subset of the FreeBSD header file was put in missing/sys/queue.h, and when building on Solaris "-Imissing" is added to the compilation. - Several "#ifndef __linux__" bits -- particularly those related to sin6_len (another BSD-ism) -- are appropriate for Solaris as well. - Solaris uses the POSIX types (uint32_t and so on) rather than the BSD types (u_int32_t). Added typedefs. - Needed libdevinfo and DLPI magic to read out hardware addresses when forming GUID. This is by far the bulk of the code. - Use SIOCLIFADDIF and SIOCLIFREMOVEIF to handle logical interfaces. The code is here, in both GNU diff and GNU tar format: http://www.workingcode.com/dhcpv6/ I've only been using the server side of WIDE DHCPv6, because I'm working on a native client for Solaris, but it seems to work reasonably well. I'd like to see these changes integrated into the sourceforge repository. Please let me know if there's any other information you'd like to have. -- James Carlson, KISS Network <jam...@su...> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 |
From: SUZUKI S. <su...@us...> - 2006-11-05 06:41:59
|
>>>>> On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 13:35:52 +0900 >>>>> na...@li...(Masahide NAKAMURA) said: > Currently dhcp6s cannot accept '-P' option correctly and > always assumes it as a wrong argument. Please apply the patch below > to fix it. The proposed fix has been committed. Thanks. ---- SUZUKI, Shinsuke @ KAME Project |
From: Masahide N. <na...@li...> - 2006-11-05 04:36:04
|
Hi, Currently dhcp6s cannot accept '-P' option correctly and always assumes it as a wrong argument. Please apply the patch below to fix it. FYI, I don't see the same issue for dhcp6c code. Cheers, -- Masahide NAKAMURA diff -urp wide-dhcpv6-20061016-orig/dhcp6s.c wide-dhcpv6-20061016-work/dhcp6s.c --- wide-dhcpv6-20061016-orig/dhcp6s.c 2006-08-07 13:35:32.000000000 +0900 +++ wide-dhcpv6-20061016-work/dhcp6s.c 2006-11-04 16:09:50.000000000 +0900 @@ -279,6 +279,7 @@ main(argc, argv) break; case 'P': pid_file = optarg; + break; default: usage(); /* NOTREACHED */ |
From: SUZUKI S. <su...@us...> - 2006-11-05 00:10:07
|
>>>>> On Fri, 03 Nov 2006 23:04:36 +0900 >>>>> na...@li...(Masahide NAKAMURA) said: > I have a minor patch for wide-dhcpv6 to fix to build with the configured > result about lex library. Please apply it. Committed it to the CVS-repository (in a little bit different manner to fix a compilation error at Debian on Alpha). Thanks, ---- SUZUKI, Shinsuke @ KAME Project |
From: Masahide N. <na...@li...> - 2006-11-03 14:04:37
|
Hello, I have a minor patch for wide-dhcpv6 to fix to build with the configured result about lex library. Please apply it. I found this issue when I tried to build wide-dhcpv6 on SuSE linux which provides only libfl by flex as lex library. Regards, -- Masahide NAKAMURA diff -urp wide-dhcpv6-20061016-orig/Makefile.in wide-dhcpv6-20061016-work/Makefile.in --- wide-dhcpv6-20061016-orig/Makefile.in 2006-10-13 21:19:12.000000000 +0900 +++ wide-dhcpv6-20061016-work/Makefile.in 2006-11-03 22:37:54.000000000 +0900 @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ CFLAGS= @CFLAGS@ @DEFS@ -DSYSCONFDIR=\"$ -DLOCALDBDIR=\"${localdbdir}\" LDFLAGS=@LDFLAGS@ LIBOBJS=@LIBOBJS@ -LIBS= @LIBS@ -ly -ll +LIBS= @LIBS@ -ly @LEXLIB@ CC= @CC@ TARGET= dhcp6c dhcp6s dhcp6relay dhcp6ctl |
From: Arne B. <ar...@st...> - 2006-10-27 14:13:43
|
Hi all! I want to use wide-dhcpv6 for prefix delegation. I have setup a test szenario with 3 machines. One as upstream (ISP) router, one as local router(home gateway) and a client which gets its addresses from the local router via dhcpv6. Everything works ok to the point that i get a prefix from "upstream" via dhcpv6c , the prefix is correctly assigned to the corresponding, "internal" interface. The client pc also gets correct configurations if i configure them statically in dhcp6s. But what i would like to have is that the dhcpv6 server is reconfigured dynamically after i receive the prefixes from upstream. Is there a way to achieve this ? I tried with the dhcp6c script option but it seems, the script is not informed of any prefixes from the client.... Any ideas what i should do ?? Thanks, arne |