Could I make a point to this change those changes again for a recorsideration, please?
Cheers, Petr On 9/22/21 16:33, Petr Menšík wrote: > > I made error in patch2. Fixed it and added patch3, adding support for > client-arch also for IPv6. > > I have used following configuration for dnsmasq on libvirt network: > > log-dhcp > port=0 > interface=host0 > > dhcp-sequential-ip > dhcp-range=::,static > dhcp-match=ipxe,175 > # dhcpv6s for Client System Architecture Type (61) > dhcp-match=set:efi6,option6:61,0007 > dhcp-match=set:efi6,option6:61,0009 > dhcp-match=set:efi6,option6:61,0011 > dhcp-userclass=set:ipxe6,iPXE > dhcp-vendorclass=set:efi6,PXEClient > # Client is PXE booting over EFI without iPXE ROM; send EFI version of iPXE > chainloader > dhcp-option=tag:efi6,tag:!ipxe6,option6:bootfile-url,tftp://[2620:dead:beef:4::1]/shimx64.efi > > enable-tftp > tftp-root=/tftproot # use /var/lib/tftproot as alternative, tftp-server > package > > # Use static allocated only, replace with MAC of your client VM > dhcp-host=52:54:00:06:57:c3,tag:dhcpv6,netboot.test,[2620:dead:beef:4::d1],[2620:dead:beef:4::d2],[2620:dead:beef:4::d3],120 > > It requires radvd running on the the same host, because I think dnsmasq > itself cannot provide this combination. > Interface has to broadcast those flags: AdvSendAdvert on; AdvManagedFlag on; > > Now create a new VM using libvirt (virt-manager), no disk image. > I used EFI bios, but I expect any TianoCore firmware powered machine would > behave the same. Leave IPv4 booting not working, it is tried first. Then IPv6 > is tried. > In combination with radvd, it would require two addresses. > One for plain IP address, the second for obtaining also boot url and > parameters. > Depending on their order, it may boot even without a change. Sometimes. > It should boot always after those patches, increasing reliability of DHCP > assignments. > > Cheers, > Petr > On 9/20/21 11:55, Harald Jensas wrote: >> On 9/17/21 21:16, Petr Menšík wrote: >>> Hi Harald, Simon, >>> >>> I made an alternative change, which I think has similar output. I >>> think the use of DHCP6UNSPEC is suspicious itself and does not have >>> any good error code assigned by RFC 8415, because it should not >>> result in an error. I have tried to add also MUST require from the >>> RFC, refusing off-link requests with NotOnLink error. Not yet tested >>> it myself, I have no IPv6 booting environment available (yet). That >>> is in patch1. >>> >>> Patch2 is just bunch of const changes, reduction of repeated status >>> code filling into dedicated function. Should not change behaviour, >>> just reduces few lines and some cosmetic changes. >>> >> >> Thanks Petr! >> >> I did a couple of IPv6 network boot tests using your patches and can >> confirm that it works as expected. >> >> >> -- >> Harald >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list >> Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk >> https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss > -- > Petr Menšík > Software Engineer > Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/ > email: pemen...@redhat.com > PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB -- Petr Menšík Software Engineer Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/ email: pemen...@redhat.com PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB
_______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
