Bug#652573: busybox-udeb: debian stable busybox udhcp client does not support /32 netmasks
On 2 Jun 2012, at 22:14, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> On 02.06.2012 23:59, Conrad Wood wrote:
> []
>> In some "cloud" environments, including ours, we configure an ethernet device with a single /32 IP Address. Say, for example 5.6.7.8/32. The Default Gateway is, for example, 9.10.11.12. The linux kernel and BSD happily work as desired and send out an arp request out of the ethernet device and route _everything_ to the default gateway.
>> Configuring this manually is straightforward and works as desired.
>
>> Using the ISC-DHCP client also works as desired. It picks up IP, Netmaks and gateway perfectly well.
>
>> However, in the installer, with the busybox dhcp client, it stalls and claims it is unable to configure the network interfaces. Anything _apart_ from /32 (say /31, /30 etc.) works ok. But then the gateway won't be reachable, as the kernel then tries to do 'propper(?)' routing instead of just forwarding the packets.
>
> Did you try using busybox dhcp client on an already
> installed system, as opposed to the debian installer?
>
> I just tried - dnsmasq as dhcp server, and squeeze busybox -
> it accepts the /32 netmask just fine and configures the
> interface accordingly. I had to overwrite "netmask" option
> on the server, setting it explicitly, and I verified with
> tcpdump that the server sends correct DHCP reply with the
> right netmask.
>
> But I'm not actually sure how debian installer configures
> the network...
>
> Thanks,
>
> /mjt
>
Hm, I believe we did. +CC Jens Ott, our network guru, I think he did try. Let's see what he has to say about that ;)
Conrad
Conrad Wood
(Deputy CTO, Head of Research & Innovations)
ProfitBricks GmbH
Greifswalder Str. 207
D - 10405 Berlin
Office: +49 30 51 64 09 21
DDI: +49 30 51 300 021
Email: conrad.wood@profitbricks.com
URL: http://www.profitbricks.com/
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 125506 B.
Geschäftsführer: Andreas Gauger, Achim Weiss
Reply to: