Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] Re: RA-acquired address not marked as 'dynamic' with 2.82

2020-09-07 Thread Dominik
Hey Iain, On 07.09.20 13:22, Iain Lane wrote: > The lifetimes are *forever* now, but the intention of that commit is > that they were supposed to be one day (86400 seconds). I think maybe the > intention of the commit was this (attached)? Yes, that's the problem here. The variable time is

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] Re: RA-acquired address not marked as 'dynamic' with 2.82

2020-09-07 Thread Iain Lane
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 07:37:10PM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > I might understand the re-location of CONTEXT_SETLEASE > > I don't understand the change from '3 * param->adv_interval' > to '2 * param->adv_interval'. > > > And my actual message: the patch has been seen ... How curious. Is

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] Re: RA-acquired address not marked as 'dynamic' with 2.82

2020-09-07 Thread Geert Stappers
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 12:22:24PM +0100, Iain Lane wrote: > > > > The only related difference I can see between v2.81 and v2.82 seem to be > > this one: > > http://thekelleys.org.uk/gitweb/?p=dnsmasq.git;a=commit;h=4d85e409cd2f4b0935d6ac5e8c72f6a151735d52 > > > > It's not clear to me when the

Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] RA-acquired address not marked as 'dynamic' with 2.82

2020-09-07 Thread Dominik
On 04.09.20 11:46, Iain Lane wrote: > Hi, > > In Ubuntu we started seeing failures of NetworkManager's tests when we > updated to dnsmasq 2.82 (from the Debian package; thanks Simon for > maintaining this). Search for 'Regex didn't match' in: > > >

[Dnsmasq-discuss] [PATCH] Re: RA-acquired address not marked as 'dynamic' with 2.82

2020-09-07 Thread Iain Lane
Hi Dominik, On Sun, Sep 06, 2020 at 11:30:46PM +0200, Dominik wrote: > > dnsmasq 2.81: > > inet6 fd42:d287:488a:d7e8:216:3eff:fecb:d41b/64 scope global dynamic > > mngtmpaddr noprefixroute > > > > dnsmasq 2.82: > > inet6 fd42:d287:488a:d7e8:216:3eff:fecb:d41b/64 scope global mngtmpaddr