[Dibbler] [Bug report]Bug in Server which receives layerd Relay-agents Relay-Forward message

[Hideshi.Enokihara at jp.yokogawa.com]

Hello Tomasz,

Sorry for my delay response.
We have been in national holidays for about 1 week.

Thank so much you for your fixing the bug.

Now, I'm checking the behavior.
I will let you know if the snapshot works for you or not

Thanks again,
Hideshi
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tomasz Mrugalski [mailto:thomson at klub.com.pl] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 6:46 AM
> To: Dibbler users list
> Subject: Re: [Dibbler] [Bug report]Bug in Server which 
> receives layerd Relay-agents Relay-Forward message
> 
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 somebody known as 
> Hideshi.Enokihara at jp.yokogawa.com wrote:
> 
> > I'm using dibbler as server in following topology.
> >
> > Client------network1-------Relay Agent1-----network2--------Relay 
> > Agnet2------Server
> >
> > Cleint:Windows Vista
> > Relay Agent1:Sourceforge DHCPv6
> > Relay Agent2:WIDE-DHCPv6
> > Server:dibbler
> >
> > In this topology,
> > Client sends a Solict, then Relay Agent1 relays this 
> messate to Relay 
> > Agnet2.
> > Relay Anget2 sent Relay-Forward Solicit message to ff05::1:3.
> > After that, Server sends a Relay-Reply message.
> >
> > But the Relay-Reply message is malformed.
> > The message does not include layed Relay message.
> > Please refer attached file, No.25.
> >
> > I would like a patch for this.
> > Could someone help me, please?
> Ok, it took some time, but I've got this issue fixed. I have 
> prepared a snapshot. You can download it here:
> http://klub.com.pl/dhcpv6/snapshots/2007-05-01-relay-fix/
> 
> Right now server is able to handle requests sent via 2 relays 
> and properly generates answer. Also relays properly handle 
> traffic from other relays.
> 
> As for homogenous environment (e.g. non-dibber DHCPv6 server 
> + dibbler relay + dibbler clients) - the main cause of 
> problem was that dibbler relay always placed interface-id 
> option at the end of the message.
> Right now I have implemented new configuration parameter, so 
> sysadmin can define, where interface-id option should be 
> placed. Unofortunately, that is not documented yet.
> 
> Please let me know if that snapshot works for you or not.
> 
> Ok, I hope that one is fixed. The next thing is a prefix 
> delegation problem reported on the dibbler-devel.
> 
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Tomasz Mrugalski,              | "I think there is a world 
> market for     |
> thomson(at)klub(dot)com(dot)pl |  about five computers."      
>             |
>                                 |     Thomas J. Watson 
> (Chairman, IBM) 1943|
> _______________________________________________
> http://klub.com.pl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dibbler
>