Bridged AP mode with dynamic IP

[octavioj]

I was wondering if it would be a good idea to introduce a bridged mode with a dynamic IP. I understand from the documentation that you make the case for a static IP address to access the web interface. But in a situation where this will be deployed with local names and local DNS resolution, the requirement for a static IP disappears, does it not? This would also help the case when one tries to deploy this in Docker, where the IP of the Docker host is dynamic as well. Am I missing something? Thank you for this. It is a great piece of software.

[cookesan]

This image is host-network oriented, so bridged/routed AP behavior is mostly a host networking problem rather than a Docker bridge setting.

The README run command uses --privileged --network=host, and the forwarding/NAT examples are written against the host's real interfaces, such as eth0 and wlan0. It also says to substitute those names for your setup. That means the container is not abstracting the AP behind its own Docker bridge IP.

A dynamic host IP is fine for reaching the web UI if you use DHCP/DNS, but the AP bridge/routing rules still need to match the host interfaces and address plan. I do not see a one-option dynamic bridged-AP mode in this Docker image.

[billz]

The static IP setting was added to address a common pain point for users; if the device gets a new DHCP lease, you lose access to the RaspAP UI. In the default routed AP mode, wlan0 (the AP) and eth0 (uplink) are on different network segments. Avahi binds to the uplink interface, but wireless clients on wlan0 are on the 10.3.141.0/24 subnet behind NAT. So when a wireless client sends an mDNS query for hostname.local, it stays on the 10.3.141.0/24 segment and avahi never sees it.

In Bridged AP mode, wlan0 and eth0 are on a single segment (br0). Multicast traffic flows between wireless clients and the Pi, so hostname.local resolves with mDNS. This dynamic IP + mDNS combination only works reliably in bridged AP mode, or when accessing your device on its wired interface.

I can see a case for making the static IP address optional, rather than required as it is now. This could be a checkbox or toggle with something like "use dynamic IP address (requires local DNS)".

[octavioj]

I like the idea of the toggle. Would make it simple and would solve the problem of requiring a static IP address. In the meantime, I will create a VM with a static address to solve this issue. Thank you for the quick reply.

[billz]

Current progress...

The UI is the easy part :) The app currently manages a bridgedEnable state. A new state (bridgedDynamic) will need to be added throughout the backend.

[octavioj]

This looks good. Thank you. But take your time.

[billz]

PR available for testing RaspAP/raspap-webgui#2132