You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
go to: Network → Interfaces → Add new interface... or bond0 (a Link Aggregation (Channel Bonding) interface) → Advanced Settings
add one or more Slave Interfaces
Set Bonding Policy to IEEE 802.3ad Dynamic link aggregation (802.3ad, 4)
go to: General Settings tab
clear IPv4 address and IPv4 netmask
Save
Actual behaviour:
Expecting: non-empty value
Unable to create a Layer 2 bonding interface which can directly requisition an IP via DHCP
The link aggregation device must be configured with a dummy non-colliding address (such as a loopback address) which serves no purpose/has potential to cause tangential issues which would otherwise be unnecessary (with regards to the Linux bonding driver itself)
A parent bridge device containing the subsequently generated bond-bond0 device, as expected, can be configured as part of a DHCP client interface, rendering the mandated dummy static IP assigned to the bond interface entirely redundant
Expected behavior:
A bonding Device (not an Interface, per the LuCI abstraction) can be created directly, without the requirement of a dummy static IP, and have its address managed with any combination of:
as part of a Static address interface
as part of a DHCP client interface
as part of a parent bridge device, which itself is managed with a DHCP client interface
Additional Information:
using DHCP for a bonded interface (per the Linux kernel terminology) is supported (but requires active slaves, of course; something has to be able to broadcast the DHCP request)
most tools in the Linux ecosystem have supported DHCP for bonded devices since at least 2004
for example, netplan does not require either static or DHCP addresses to be configured, but also accepts and works perfectly fine with either approaches
@jow- inherited from, but also enforced here (luci-proto-bonding); both the openwrt/luci and openwrt/packages side of this are enforcing this limitation - #23676 was already opened to reflect that (sorry for not linking them already; doing that now, with this comment), so if you wouldn't mind transferring back to the openwrt/luci repo's issue tracker, it avoids the redundancy, and reflects the issue in the luci-proto-bonding + proto-bonding packages
Will recreate, just to ensure this isn't lost to track the issue on openwrt/luci; end effect is attributable to both openwrt/packages as well as openwrt/luci
Steps to reproduce:
Network
→Interfaces
→Add new interface...
orbond0
(aLink Aggregation (Channel Bonding)
interface) →Advanced Settings
Slave Interfaces
Bonding Policy
toIEEE 802.3ad Dynamic link aggregation (802.3ad, 4)
General Settings
tabIPv4 address
andIPv4 netmask
Actual behaviour:
Expecting: non-empty value
bond-bond0
device, as expected, can be configured as part of aDHCP client
interface, rendering the mandated dummy static IP assigned to the bond interface entirely redundantExpected behavior:
A bonding
Device
(not anInterface
, per the LuCI abstraction) can be created directly, without the requirement of a dummy static IP, and have its address managed with any combination of:Static address
interfaceDHCP client
interfaceDHCP client
interfaceAdditional Information:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: