Why WIDE though? It’s crusty and old and full of bugs. There’s a more modern DHCP client implementation for Linux that’s neither WIDE nor ISC.
http://roy.marples.name/projects/dhcpcd/index > On Jan 27, 2016, at 1:37 PM, Nicholas Williams > <nicholas+v...@nicholaswilliams.net> wrote: > > I spent some time this morning re-familiarizing myself with this topic (I've > set it down for the last year because I've been otherwise occupied). I > scoured the webz for any sign that ISC plans on fixing the two core > discrepancies in their DHCPv6-PD support: > > 1. Being able to change the values sent in the DHCPv6-PD request to specify > the requested prefix length desired. > 2. Being able to divy-up the ISP-delegated prefix and assign it to internal > interfaces. > > If ISC would just support #1 (a must for any legitimate DHCPv6 client), we > could hack around #2 with scripts. Unfortunately, one ear later, there there > is no sign that ISC has any intention of fixing this issue, and I don't feel > confident that patches would be welcome. I think they don't want it fixed > because they don't think it's a good feature. > > Given all this, I believe the best way forward is to integrate Wide-DHCPv6 > client into VyOS: https://sourceforge.net/projects/wide-dhcpv6/ > > By all indications, Wide should largely be a drop-in replacement for ISC for > DHCPv6 requests. So, given that, here is my proposed roadmap: > > Step 1: Replace ISC with Wide for DHCPv6 client requests, but make no other > changes. Put out a beta version that many people can test. Ensure everything > still works the way it is working now. This help isolate any problems caused > by this migration from any problems that could be caused by changing prefix > delegation in VyOS. > > Step 2: Add necessary configuration options and scripting for requesting > prefix lengths and delegating them to internal interfaces. Put out a beta > version that many people can test. Ensure everything still works the way it > is working now. > > Step 3. Release > > What I don't fully understand is to what extent we're using ISC. Are we using > it as both a client and a server? Are we using a single process for client > and server, or separate processes? Are we using a single process for DHCPv4 > and DHCPv6, or separate processes? The answers to those questions will help > to determine how much work Step 1 involves. Wide-DHCPv6 is only a client, and > only for v6. So we'll have to keep using ISC for v4 and serving (if we're > using it for serving). > > Nick > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Nicholas Williams > <nicholas+v...@nicholaswilliams.net> wrote: > > I see Bug ID 112 about adding a proper DHCPv6 PD support. I’d also like to > > see a proper CLAT implementation for VyOS for users who use service > > providers that are kind enough to provide a PLAT service to their customers. > > > > Is there any concerted effort going on right now to actually get this work > > done? IE is there someone I should talk to about contributing to the > > effort? > > Daniel, > > I'm not familiar with CLAT/PLAT, but I am mostly familiar with Prefix > Delegation and IA_PD. Because I'm a Comcast residential customer, I am > very motivated to get PD working with my VyOS installation. You'll see > I have been involved in discussions in Big ID 112 already. I am not > super familiar with the VyOS source code, but I am willing to help in > any way I can, including testing experimental images of VyOS with a > new DHCP client and debugging issues. I may even, once I become more > familiar with the changes happening, be able to suggest changes that > need to happen in the code to get this working. > > Nick > > _______________________________________________ > Vyos-developers mailing list > Vyos-developers@lists.tuxis.nl > https://lists.tuxis.nl/listinfo/vyos-developers _______________________________________________ Vyos-developers mailing list Vyos-developers@lists.tuxis.nl https://lists.tuxis.nl/listinfo/vyos-developers
