Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Added option prefix_route_link_local to dhcpy6d-clients.conf #54

Merged

Conversation

FelixJacobi
Copy link
Contributor

@FelixJacobi FelixJacobi commented Jan 3, 2022

This is a follow-up to #38 and #39. This changed the default behavior of calling hooks for prefix. It was reasonable, but sometimes you are required explicitly to use the link-local address, e.g. when the client receives more than one address.

To allow everyone to set the required behavior, this adds a prefix_route_link_local in dhcpy6d-clients.conf.

TODO:

  • Update doc
  • Test changes! (therefore a draft yet)
  • @HenriWahl What about changes to configuration database scheme? Is that fine, or should we avoid that?

@FelixJacobi FelixJacobi force-pushed the allow-configuring-link-local-routing branch 2 times, most recently from 920a9d3 to 524c829 Compare January 3, 2022 08:04
@HenriWahl
Copy link
Owner

Looks interesting.

Changing the database scheme for the client config is challenging, because the config database might as well be a view from an external source and thus not as fully under control of dhcpy6d as the leases storage. I know of at least one setup working this way.

A solution may be to provide a dhcpy6d config option, which version of client config should be used and so use different database queries according to the desired version. Lets name the current scheme version 1, your proposed version 2 and lets see what other versions may come in the future?

@FelixJacobi FelixJacobi force-pushed the allow-configuring-link-local-routing branch from 524c829 to 09aeba0 Compare February 8, 2022 01:27
@FelixJacobi
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @HenriWahl,

Back here again ^^ . I extended the MR (untested yet, just a draft to figure out a proper concept) with a store schema version. WDYT about it?

@FelixJacobi FelixJacobi force-pushed the allow-configuring-link-local-routing branch from 09aeba0 to 7ba8685 Compare March 14, 2022 03:24
@FelixJacobi FelixJacobi marked this pull request as ready for review April 17, 2022 17:03
@FelixJacobi
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @HenriWahl,

in the meantime, I have tested the changes extensively in production. How should we proceed here?

@HenriWahl HenriWahl merged commit 9facd57 into HenriWahl:master May 14, 2023
@FelixJacobi FelixJacobi deleted the allow-configuring-link-local-routing branch May 14, 2023 16:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants