Hello Timo, or anyone else affected,

Accepted dnsmasq into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dnsmasq/2.86-1.1ubuntu0.5 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
jammy to verification-done-jammy. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-jammy. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: dnsmasq (Ubuntu Jammy)
       Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-jammy

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to dnsmasq in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2042587

Title:
  jammy's version breaks existing dhcp scripts with relay

Status in dnsmasq package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in dnsmasq source package in Jammy:
  Fix Committed

Bug description:
  [ Impact ]

  When upgrading from focal to jammy, existing dnsmasq dhcp-scripts
  stopped working in an environment where a DHCP relay is in use.
  Instead of the expected client IP address, the script gets the _relay_
  IP address as an argument.

  This was fixed in 2.87, therefore making only jammy carry an affected
  package.

  [ Test Plan ]

  To easily test this on a single machine, a test script is being
  provided to setup networking and dnsmasq configuration.

  # Launch a jammy VM

  lxc launch ubuntu-daily:jammy j-dnsmasq-2042587 --vm

  # open a root shell in that VM. All subsequent commands must be
  executed as root in that VM

  lxc shell j-dnsmasq-2042587

  # download test script

  wget
  
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dnsmasq/+bug/2042587/+attachment/5738174/+files/setup-
  and-server.sh

  # make it executable

  chmod +x setup-and-server.sh

  # install dnsmasq. Ignore the postinst error (because systemd-resolved
  is also running and there is a port conflict)

  apt update && apt install dnsmasq -y

  # run the setup script. It will configure things and start dnsmasq
  ready to be tested

  ./setup-and-server.sh

  # in another root session inside the vm (so run "lxc shell
  j-dnsmasq-2042587" in another terminal), run the proposed commands
  from the setup script (and press ctrl-c after the result is shown):

  No DHCP relay:

    ip netns exec client dhclient -d -v p2

  The setup script should log an IP that is not a relay. For example:
  dnsmasq-dhcp: DHCPDISCOVER(p1) aa:a0:9d:00:5b:d6
  dnsmasq-dhcp: DHCPOFFER(p1) 192.168.47.150 aa:a0:9d:00:5b:d6
  dnsmasq-dhcp: DHCPREQUEST(p1) 192.168.47.150 aa:a0:9d:00:5b:d6
  dnsmasq-dhcp: DHCPACK(p1) 192.168.47.150 aa:a0:9d:00:5b:d6 j-dnsmasq-2042587
  ###########################
  IP = 192.168.47.150
  ###########################

  With DHCP relay set to 192.168.47.9, IP should NOT be that address:

    ip netns exec client dhclient -d -v p2 -g 192.168.47.9

  With the affected dnsmasq package, we will see an error:
  dnsmasq-dhcp: DHCPREQUEST(p1) 192.168.47.150 aa:a0:9d:00:5b:d6
  dnsmasq-dhcp: DHCPACK(p1) 192.168.47.150 aa:a0:9d:00:5b:d6 j-dnsmasq-2042587
  ###########################
  IP = 192.168.47.9
  TEST FAILED
  ###########################

  The error is that the obtained IP is that of the dhcp relay (provided
  via the -g option).

  With the fixed dnsmasq package, "TEST FAILED" must not appear, and the
  IP should not be that of the provided dhcp relay.

  [ Where problems could occur ]

  If the fix is incorrect, it would mean the dhcp-script would get an incorrect 
IP again, or perhaps we could have crashes in dnsmasq when dealing with buffers 
and pointers if the dhcp-script option is in use.
  This fix was committed upstream a few months after the bug was introduced, so 
it took a while to be noticed.

  [ Other Info ]
  Not at this time.

  [ Original description ]

  When upgrading from focal to jammy, existing dnsmasq dhcp-scripts
  stopped working in an environment where a DHCP relay is in use.
  Instead of the expected client IP address, the script gets the _relay_
  IP address as an argument. From dnsmasq documentation for --dhcp-
  script:

  > The arguments to the process are "add", "old" or "del", the MAC
  address of the host (or DUID for IPv6) , the IP address, and the
  hostname, if known.

  I believe the change has been inadverently made in upstream commit
  527c3c7d0d3bb4bf5fad699f10cf0d1a45a54692
  
(https://thekelleys.org.uk/gitweb/?p=dnsmasq.git;a=blobdiff;f=src/helper.c;h=02340a01c00031db0cc682c8a4a279cfc1db574e;hp=d81de9622e6d484a264496b2cd3638b4e15e9677;hb=527c3c7d0d3bb4bf5fad699f10cf0d1a45a54692;hpb=fcb4dcaf7cc8a86ac2533b933161b6455f75bf8f)
  as the commit message only speaks about inet_ntoa replacement and not
  the behavioral change it also introduces (previously the relay address
  was only set to the environment variable, now it effectively overrides
  the prevoiusly set client's IP address).

  dnsmasq 2.86-1.1ubuntu0.3 / Ubuntu 22.04

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dnsmasq/+bug/2042587/+subscriptions


-- 
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to     : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Reply via email to