Re: [Kea-users] CIDR or range notation in relay lists when using shared-networks?
Hello all,
Thanks for the responses, and sorry for the ambiguity in my original
question, so I'll try to clarify. FWIW, my team had no input into the
network design process, we just got saddled with a bespoke implementation
and have been adapting as we go.
This is the basic model:
- an instance of Kea behind a single unicast IP handles all DHCP for the
entire physical site
- each switch is configured to use this same unicast IP as its DHCP helper
address
- the site has multiple distinct networks distributed across multiple
switches via VXLAN
- each VXLAN uses a distinct relay address to forward DHCP requests to the
helper IP
- each relay address is in a subnet reserved specifically just for relay
addresses
We're already using the macro to manage the existing (and
growing) list of relay IPs, but what I'm really looking for is to be able
to use CIDR notation or Kea range notation instead of using individual IPs,
e.g., this is what the relays list looks like right now:
"""
["192.168.120.16", "192.168.120.17", "192.168.120.18", "192.168.120.19",
"192.168.120.20", "192.168.120.21", "192.168.120.22", "192.168.120.23",
"192.168.120.232", "192.168.120.233", "192.168.120.234", "192.168.120.235",
"192.168.120.236", "192.168.120.237", "192.168.120.238", "192.168.120.239",
"192.168.120.240", "192.168.120.241", "192.168.120.242", "192.168.120.243",
"192.168.120.244", "192.168.120.245", "192.168.120.246", "192.168.152.18",
"192.168.152.19", "192.168.152.20", "192.168.152.21", "192.168.152.22",
"192.168.152.23", "192.168.152.24", "192.168.152.25", "192.168.152.26",
"192.168.152.27", "192.168.152.28", "192.168.152.29", "192.168.184.18",
"192.168.184.19", "192.168.184.20", "192.168.184.21", "192.168.184.22",
"192.168.184.23", "192.168.216.16", "192.168.216.17", "192.168.216.18",
"192.168.216.19", "192.168.216.20", "192.168.216.21", "192.168.252.16",
"192.168.252.17", "192.168.88.18", "192.168.88.19", "192.168.88.20",
"192.168.88.21", "192.168.88.22", "192.168.88.23", "192.168.88.24",
"192.168.88.25", "192.168.88.26", "192.168.88.27", "192.168.88.28",
"192.168.88.29", "192.168.88.30", "192.168.88.31", "192.168.88.32",
"192.168.88.33", "192.168.88.34", "192.168.88.35", "192.168.88.36",
"192.168.88.37", "192.168.88.38", "192.168.88.39", "192.168.88.40",
"192.168.88.41", "192.168.88.42", "192.168.88.43", "192.168.88.44"]
"""
and what I would love to do instead is write that as this:
"""
["192.168.120.0/24", "192.168.152.0/26", "192.168.184.0/26", "
192.168.216.0/25", "192.168.252.0/25", "192.168.88.0/24"]
"""
or perhaps more accurately as this:
"""
["192.168.120.10-192.168.120.253", "192.168.152.10-192.168.152.62",
"192.168.184.10-192.168.152.62", "192.168.216.10-192.168.216.126",
"192.168.252.10-192.168.252.62", "192.168.88.10-192.168.88.253"]
"""
The driver here is that it's been difficult to maintain the list of
individual IPs because we're not kept in the loop when a new relay IP gets
allocated, and the only solid info I can squeeze out of our network team is
the subnets they've set aside specifically for relay IP addresses.
So I figured that if I could use address ranges in the relays list instead
of individual IPs then I don't have to update the relays file as frequently
and DHCP is less likely to not offer an IP because the incoming relay
address is currently unknown.
I hope this adds a bit more context to my original question!
thanks,
Klaus
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 6:32 AM Simon wrote:
> Darren Ankney wrote:
>
> > In addition to what Peter said, another option would be to use shared
> > networks and add the subnet for relays along with the subnet of
> > addresses that you wish to allocate to the clients to a shared
> > network. See:
> https://kea.readthedocs.io/en/kea-2.2.0/arm/dhcp4-srv.html#shared-networks-in-dhcpv4
> >
> > Example:
> >
> > {
> > "Dhcp4": {
> >"shared-networks": [
> >{
> > "subnet4": [
> >{
> >// relays
> >"subnet": "10.1.0.0/21"
> >},
> >{
> >// client subnet
> >"subnet": "192.0.2.0/24",
> >"pools": [ { "pool": "192.0.2.100 - 192.0.2.199" } ]
> >}
> >]
> >}
> > ]
> > }
> > }
>
> That won’t work in the sort of situation I think the OP is referring to -
> but I admit it’s not completely clear.
> You can only associate the relays subnet with one client subnet. So once
> you introduce more than one client subnet, it breaks.
>
>
> PM Klaus Steden wrote:
>
> >> In some of our environments, we deal with DHCP relays, and their
> addresses seem to proliferate faster than we can update our configs, which
> leads to delays with DHCP service.
> >>
> >> However, they have reserved an entire /21 for relay IPs, and ideally, I
> would like to be able to add that entire network as a relay instead of what
> I'm currently doing, which is adding individual IPs when I notice them
> reported
Re: [Kea-users] got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in reservations map.
You can't specify the option 51 dhcp-lease-time because it is directly managed by Kea. BTW if you were allowed to change it (which still can be done by the flex-option hook) it would not change the valid lifetime in the lease database so would be very far from what you wanted... Regards Francis Dupont -- ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information. To unsubscribe visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users. Kea-users mailing list Kea-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users
Re: [Kea-users] got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in reservations map.
I don't know. You should probably test, or get the answer of an expert.
From: Kraishak Mahtha
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 11:19 AM
To: Veronique Lefebure
Cc: kea-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: [Kea-users] got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in
reservations map.
Hi Veronique,
So for a reservation entry, if we want to define a lease time that is different
from subnet can we do as follows? i.e define only the option
51(dhcp-lease-time) will this be efficient ?
"subnet4": [
{
"subnet": "4.0.0.0/16",
"valid-lifetime": 3600,
"reservations": [
{
"ip-address": "4.0.255.243",
"hostname": "3G00034Phone",
"valid-lifetime": 126,
"hw-address": "aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:55",
"option-data": [
{
"data": "126",
"name": "dhcp-lease-time"
},
{
"data": "4.0.0.1",
"name": "routers"
}
]
}
],
"option-data": [
{
"data": "test.com",
"name": "domain-name"
},
{
"data": "255.255.0.0",
"name": "subnet-mask"
},
{
"data": "4.0.0.1",
"name": "routers"
}
],
"pools": [
{
"pool": "4.0.0.2-4.0.0.202"
}
],
"id": 843191
}
]
Thanks
Kraishak
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 3:18 PM Veronique Lefebure
mailto:veronique.lefeb...@cern.ch>> wrote:
Hi,
If you look at https://kea.readthedocs.io/en/latest/grammar/grammar.html you
can see that valid_life_time is not an attribute of host-reservations:
reservation_param ::= duid
753 | reservation_client_classes
754 | client_id_value
755 | circuit_id_value
756 | flex_id_value
757 | ip_address
758 | hw_address
759 | hostname
760 | option_data_list
761 | next_server
762 | server_hostname
763 | boot_file_name
764 | user_context
765 | comment
766 | unknown_map_entry
Cheers,
Veronique
From: Kea-users
mailto:kea-users-boun...@lists.isc.org>> on
behalf of Kraishak Mahtha
mailto:kraishak@gmail.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 10:35 AM
To: kea-users@lists.isc.org
mailto:kea-users@lists.isc.org>>
Subject: [Kea-users] got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in reservations
map.
Hi All,
I am using the kea-dhcp of 2.2.0 version, I am trying to add a reservation
entry along with a valid lifetime option value but I am facing the syntax issue
saying "got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in reservations map".
kea-dhcp4 -t kea-dhcp4.conf. --> syntax validator
Syntax check failed with: kea-dhcp4.conf :59.7-22: got unexpected keyword
"valid-lifetime" in reservations map.
I took a sample example from the forums and tried as below:
"subnet4": [{
"subnet": "4.0.0.0/16",
"valid-lifetime": 3600,
"option-data": [
{
"data": "test.com",
"name": "domain-name"
},
{
"data": "255.255.0.0",
"name": "subnet-mask"
},
{
"data": "99.99.99.99",
"name": "routers"
}
],
"pools": [{
"pool": "4.0.0.2-4.0.0.202"
}],
"id": 843191
}],
"reservations": [
{
"hw-address": "01:23:45:67:89:ab",
"ip-address": "4.0.0.223",
"hostname": "example.com",
"valid-lifetime": 86400
}
]
I tried moving the reservation section inside the subnet but still I get the
same, Can someone who has familiarity with reservation entries can guide me ?
Thanks in advance
Kraishak
--
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
To unsubscribe visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users.
Kea-users mailing list
Kea-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users
Re: [Kea-users] CIDR or range notation in relay lists when using shared-networks?
Darren Ankney wrote:
> In addition to what Peter said, another option would be to use shared
> networks and add the subnet for relays along with the subnet of
> addresses that you wish to allocate to the clients to a shared
> network. See:
> https://kea.readthedocs.io/en/kea-2.2.0/arm/dhcp4-srv.html#shared-networks-in-dhcpv4
>
> Example:
>
> {
> "Dhcp4": {
>"shared-networks": [
>{
> "subnet4": [
>{
>// relays
>"subnet": "10.1.0.0/21"
>},
>{
>// client subnet
>"subnet": "192.0.2.0/24",
>"pools": [ { "pool": "192.0.2.100 - 192.0.2.199" } ]
>}
>]
>}
> ]
> }
> }
That won’t work in the sort of situation I think the OP is referring to - but I
admit it’s not completely clear.
You can only associate the relays subnet with one client subnet. So once you
introduce more than one client subnet, it breaks.
PM Klaus Steden wrote:
>> In some of our environments, we deal with DHCP relays, and their addresses
>> seem to proliferate faster than we can update our configs, which leads to
>> delays with DHCP service.
>>
>> However, they have reserved an entire /21 for relay IPs, and ideally, I
>> would like to be able to add that entire network as a relay instead of what
>> I'm currently doing, which is adding individual IPs when I notice them
>> reported in the log.
Can you clarify exactly what’s going on here ?
Is it that there is a client network with “many” relays on it; or many client
networks with one or two relays on each, but the relay addresses are not part
of the client subnet ?
If it’s the latter, then this is a “very poor” network config and not compliant
with how things are supposed to work.
Some more clarity of the network topology and config would enable a better
answer.
Simon
--
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
To unsubscribe visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users.
Kea-users mailing list
Kea-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users
Re: [Kea-users] CIDR or range notation in relay lists when using shared-networks?
Hello Klaus,
In addition to what Peter said, another option would be to use shared
networks and add the subnet for relays along with the subnet of
addresses that you wish to allocate to the clients to a shared
network. See:
https://kea.readthedocs.io/en/kea-2.2.0/arm/dhcp4-srv.html#shared-networks-in-dhcpv4
Example:
{
"Dhcp4": {
"shared-networks": [
{
"subnet4": [
{
// relays
"subnet": "10.1.0.0/21"
},
{
// client subnet
"subnet": "192.0.2.0/24",
"pools": [ { "pool": "192.0.2.100 - 192.0.2.199" } ]
}
]
}
]
}
}
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 9:45 PM Klaus Steden wrote:
>
>
> Hi there,
>
> In some of our environments, we deal with DHCP relays, and their addresses
> seem to proliferate faster than we can update our configs, which leads to
> delays with DHCP service.
>
> However, they have reserved an entire /21 for relay IPs, and ideally, I would
> like to be able to add that entire network as a relay instead of what I'm
> currently doing, which is adding individual IPs when I notice them reported
> in the log.
>
> Is this even possible? The examples in the Kea documentation only mention
> single addresses, but for big networks with lots of relays like ours, it
> would be very helpful to be able to just add an entire range of IPs and have
> Kea figure it out automatically.
>
> thanks,
> Klaus
> --
> ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
> Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
>
> To unsubscribe visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users.
>
> Kea-users mailing list
> Kea-users@lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users
--
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
To unsubscribe visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users.
Kea-users mailing list
Kea-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users
Re: [Kea-users] got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in reservations map.
Hi Veronique,
So for a reservation entry, if we want to define a lease time that is
different from subnet can we do as follows? i.e define only the option
51(dhcp-lease-time) will this be efficient ?
"subnet4": [
{
"subnet": "4.0.0.0/16",
"valid-lifetime": 3600,
"reservations": [
{
"ip-address": "4.0.255.243",
"hostname": "3G00034Phone",
"valid-lifetime": 126,
"hw-address": "aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:55",
"option-data": [
{
"data": "126",
"name": "dhcp-lease-time"
},
{
"data": "4.0.0.1",
"name": "routers"
}
]
}
],
"option-data": [
{
"data": "test.com",
"name": "domain-name"
},
{
"data": "255.255.0.0",
"name": "subnet-mask"
},
{
"data": "4.0.0.1",
"name": "routers"
}
],
"pools": [
{
"pool": "4.0.0.2-4.0.0.202"
}
],
"id": 843191
}
]
Thanks
Kraishak
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 3:18 PM Veronique Lefebure <
veronique.lefeb...@cern.ch> wrote:
> Hi,
> If you look at https://kea.readthedocs.io/en/latest/grammar/grammar.html you
> can see that valid_life_time is not an attribute of host-reservations:
>
> reservation_param ::= duid 753 | reservation_client_classes
> 754 | client_id_value 755 |
> circuit_id_value 756 | flex_id_value 757
> | ip_address 758 | hw_address 759 |
> hostname 760 | option_data_list 761 |
> next_server 762 | server_hostname 763 |
> boot_file_name 764 | user_context 765 |
> comment 766 | unknown_map_entry
>
>
> Cheers,
> Veronique
> --
> *From:* Kea-users on behalf of Kraishak
> Mahtha
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 22, 2023 10:35 AM
> *To:* kea-users@lists.isc.org
> *Subject:* [Kea-users] got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in
> reservations map.
>
> Hi All,
>
> I am using the kea-dhcp of 2.2.0 version, I am trying to add a reservation
> entry along with a valid lifetime option value but I am facing the syntax
> issue saying "got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in reservations map".
>
> kea-dhcp4 -t kea-dhcp4.conf. --> syntax validator
> Syntax check failed with: kea-dhcp4.conf :59.7-22: got unexpected keyword*
> "valid-lifetime" in reservations map.*
>
> I took a sample example from the forums and tried as below:
> "subnet4": [{
> "subnet": "4.0.0.0/16",
> "valid-lifetime": 3600,
> "option-data": [
> {
> "data": "test.com",
> "name": "domain-name"
> },
> {
> "data": "255.255.0.0",
> "name": "subnet-mask"
> },
> {
> "data": "99.99.99.99",
> "name": "routers"
> }
> ],
> "pools": [{
> "pool": "4.0.0.2-4.0.0.202"
> }],
> "id": 843191
> }],
> "reservations": [
> {
> "hw-address": "01:23:45:67:89:ab",
> "ip-address": "4.0.0.223",
> "hostname": "example.com",
> *"valid-lifetime": 86400*
> }
> ]
>
> I tried moving the reservation section inside the subnet but still I get
> the same, Can someone who has familiarity with reservation entries can
> guide me ?
>
>
> Thanks in advance
> Kraishak
>
--
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
To unsubscribe visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users.
Kea-users mailing list
Kea-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users
Re: [Kea-users] got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in reservations map.
Hi,
If you look at https://kea.readthedocs.io/en/latest/grammar/grammar.html you
can see that valid_life_time is not an attribute of host-reservations:
reservation_param ::= duid
753 | reservation_client_classes
754 | client_id_value
755 | circuit_id_value
756 | flex_id_value
757 | ip_address
758 | hw_address
759 | hostname
760 | option_data_list
761 | next_server
762 | server_hostname
763 | boot_file_name
764 | user_context
765 | comment
766 | unknown_map_entry
Cheers,
Veronique
From: Kea-users on behalf of Kraishak Mahtha
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 10:35 AM
To: kea-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: [Kea-users] got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in reservations
map.
Hi All,
I am using the kea-dhcp of 2.2.0 version, I am trying to add a reservation
entry along with a valid lifetime option value but I am facing the syntax issue
saying "got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in reservations map".
kea-dhcp4 -t kea-dhcp4.conf. --> syntax validator
Syntax check failed with: kea-dhcp4.conf :59.7-22: got unexpected keyword
"valid-lifetime" in reservations map.
I took a sample example from the forums and tried as below:
"subnet4": [{
"subnet": "4.0.0.0/16",
"valid-lifetime": 3600,
"option-data": [
{
"data": "test.com",
"name": "domain-name"
},
{
"data": "255.255.0.0",
"name": "subnet-mask"
},
{
"data": "99.99.99.99",
"name": "routers"
}
],
"pools": [{
"pool": "4.0.0.2-4.0.0.202"
}],
"id": 843191
}],
"reservations": [
{
"hw-address": "01:23:45:67:89:ab",
"ip-address": "4.0.0.223",
"hostname": "example.com",
"valid-lifetime": 86400
}
]
I tried moving the reservation section inside the subnet but still I get the
same, Can someone who has familiarity with reservation entries can guide me ?
Thanks in advance
Kraishak
--
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
To unsubscribe visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users.
Kea-users mailing list
Kea-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users
[Kea-users] got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in reservations map.
Hi All,
I am using the kea-dhcp of 2.2.0 version, I am trying to add a reservation
entry along with a valid lifetime option value but I am facing the syntax
issue saying "got unexpected keyword "valid-lifetime" in reservations map".
kea-dhcp4 -t kea-dhcp4.conf. --> syntax validator
Syntax check failed with: kea-dhcp4.conf :59.7-22: got unexpected keyword*
"valid-lifetime" in reservations map.*
I took a sample example from the forums and tried as below:
"subnet4": [{
"subnet": "4.0.0.0/16",
"valid-lifetime": 3600,
"option-data": [
{
"data": "test.com",
"name": "domain-name"
},
{
"data": "255.255.0.0",
"name": "subnet-mask"
},
{
"data": "99.99.99.99",
"name": "routers"
}
],
"pools": [{
"pool": "4.0.0.2-4.0.0.202"
}],
"id": 843191
}],
"reservations": [
{
"hw-address": "01:23:45:67:89:ab",
"ip-address": "4.0.0.223",
"hostname": "example.com",
*"valid-lifetime": 86400*
}
]
I tried moving the reservation section inside the subnet but still I get
the same, Can someone who has familiarity with reservation entries can
guide me ?
Thanks in advance
Kraishak
--
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
To unsubscribe visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users.
Kea-users mailing list
Kea-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users
