Your message dated Sun, 24 Jan 2016 12:40:19 -0500
with message-id 
<CANTw=MO7erVFYWPTaayeZb=sKD=mkbrpq_yzygyivt5rsta...@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Re: [pkg-dhcp-devel] Bug#712503: [isc-dhcp-server] dhcpd is 
listening on random port for all interfaces
has caused the Debian Bug report #712503,
regarding dhcpd is listening on random port for all interfaces
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)


-- 
712503: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=712503
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: isc-dhcp-server
Version: 4.2.2.dfsg.1-5+deb70u6
Severity: important
Tags: security

Actually, there are two issues:
1) dhcpd is listening on random port (UDP) for all interfaces, no
   configuration option or CLI switch can fix with this situation.
2) moreover, dhcpd is listening for UDPv6 too, even if you include -4
   option for dhcpd:

$ cat /etc/default/isc-dhcp-server | sed '/^$/d;/^#/d'
INTERFACES="br0"
OPTIONS="-4"
$ ps w 15686
  PID TTY      STAT   TIME COMMAND
15686 ?        Ss     0:00 /usr/sbin/dhcpd -q -4 -cf /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf -pf 
/var/run/dhcpd.pid br0
$ netstat -tulp
[...]
udp        0      0 *:9922                  *:*                                 
15686/dhcpd
udp        0      0 home.test:domain        *:*                                 
4832/named
udp        0      0 home.test:bootps        *:*                                 
15686/dhcpd
udp6       0      0 [::]:37045              [::]:*                              
15686/dhcpd

PS: See also http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=95273

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 11:04 PM, Alexey Pikalev wrote:
> Hello. Same in stable?

Closedness is not based on the packages in stable.

Best wishes,
Mike

--- End Message ---

Reply via email to