[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#652573: busybox-udeb: debian stable busybox udhcp client does not support /32 netmasks

On 05.06.2012 20:10, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> It is not udhcpc, and not the udhcpc script either.  It is busybox's
> `ip' utility.
> # busybox ip -4 add dev dummy0
> ip: invalid argument '' to 'ip'

And this is, ofcourse, a typo...  I forgot to use `addr'.

> # busybox ip -4 add dev dummy0

And this one I actually didn't run at all, hitting CtrlC
instead of Enter!

That's what happens when you do things when you're too
tired... :(  Please excuse me for the noize.  Digging
further, and I'll update the bugreports accordingly
(will restore it all back if I wont be able to find
the issue).

For now I see another _possible_ issue, which needs
to be verified in d-i: this is the place which adds
routes.  Neither debian default.script nor your script
is able to add routes:

# busybox ip r add via dev dummy0
ip: RTNETLINK answers: No such process

The same happens when using route(8) utility.  For this
to work, two routes should be added: first to the gateway
host, without the "via" part:

 # busybox ip r add dev dummy0

and second is the actual default (or whatever) route going
via that gateway, the regular way:

 # busybox ip r add via

("dev" is optional here, just like for the regular case).

Alternative is to use the keyword "onlink":

 # ip r add via dev dummy0 onlink

but this does not work with busybox (yet).

I think this /32 case is worth to handle specially, using the
onlink or two route entries.

But I'm not sure this is the actual case the regular bug is
about: for the route to work with netmask != /32, the gateway
must be within the netmask, so if you specify, eg,
for the client, the router must be

Does it look real?

But again, please note that the script provided by Jens should
fail exactly the same way!  So... I guess it is not the issue... :(

Thank you for patience!


Reply to: