[Dibbler] Per client prefix delegation ?

Tomasz Mrugalski thomson at klub.com.pl
Fri Mar 9 21:02:13 CET 2012


On 06.03.2012 00:06, Mickael Marchand wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I am currently testing this branch, it seems to work fine, thanks for
> writing the implementation.
> 
> I only occured something odd :
> 3103s,809628us  Server Debug     0 answers buffered. Old reply for transID=d0ef95 not found. Generating new answer.
> 3103s,809706us  Server Debug     Found per-client configuration (exception) for client with DUID=00:03:00:01:2c:76:8a:b0:fd:8c
> 3103s,809736us  Server Info      Reserved in-pool address 2a01:e0b:1000:255::1 for this client found, assigning.
> 3103s,809769us  Server Info      PD option (with IAPREFIX suboptions missing) received. 
> 3103s,809794us  Server Debug     Found per-client configuration (exception) for client with DUID=00:03:00:01:2c:76:8a:b0:fd:8c
> 3103s,809830us  Server Info      Reserved in-pool prefix 2a01:e0b:2fff::/48 for this client found, assigning.
> 3103s,809884us  Server Debug     Preference set to 255.
> 3103s,809914us  Server Debug     Found per-client configuration (exception) for client with DUID=00:03:00:01:2c:76:8a:b0:fd:8c
> 3103s,809952us  Server Warning   Client (DUID=00:03:00:01:2c:76:8a:b0:fd:8c) not found in addrDB, cannot delete address and/or client.
> 3103s,809976us  Server Debug     Address usage for class 0 decreased to 18446744073709551615.
> 
> it seems there is a counter that get decreased below 0 (2^64-1)
> and I believe this prevents further allocation of PD/Addr
Amount of available prefixes in each pool is used for decision if a pool
is suitable or not. Clearly going below 0 is a bug.

> also, I think (but the documentation does not say so ?) that the PD used
> in exceptions needs to be assigned from an existing global pd-class ?
> at least it did not seem to work without the corresponding pd-class for
> me
The code is supposed to work with both in-pool and out-of-pool
reservations. With the out of pool reservations, there's a slight
problem with getting timers right. But for since prefix/address is out
of pool anyway, I decided to make them very large. Think of them as
static assignments, so they don't have to be updated in the usual manner.

Thanks for testing this branch. I will try to look into the 2^64-1
problem next week. This weekend and Monday I'm swamped with work on
DHCPv6 failover draft. There is deadline on Monday midnight for IETF
submissions.

Cheers,
Tomek


More information about the Dibbler mailing list