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

Re: Bug#995189: RFH: isc-dhcp

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 08:25:14PM +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> Hash: SHA256
> The ISC DHCP suite has a lenghty list of bug reports that have been left unattended. Some bugs date back to DHCP 3 or even earlier.
> Additionally, recent upstream releases are still unpackaged. One release came out well ahead of the Bullseye freeze, a bug report requesting its packaging was filed, but it remains unanswered.
> Leaving a package with a priority Important in such utter state of neglect is unacceptable.
> At this point, it has become clear that, at the very least, its maintainers need help, hence why I filed this WNPP bug.

It's worth noting also that ISC's DHCP client, packaged as
isc-dhcp-client from the isc-dhcp source package, is considered EOL
upstream.  As it's still the first recommended DHCP client by ifupdown,
and ifupdown is still Priority: important, most systems are likely to be
installing isc-dhcp-client.

We may want to start a broader conversation about the default DHCP
client package in Debian.  The maintainers of these packages should
obviously be involved.

For what it's worth, my preference would be transition to
systemd-networkd with bookworm.  If we keep the ifup/ifdown commands
from ifupdown at all, I think they should be fairly this wrappers around
their networkd equivalents.  I don't think we should install something
like netplan by default.

And, of course, environments that currently pull in NetworkManager
should continue to do so if it makes sense.  Although by default, I
believe that NetworkManager uses the ISC dhclient as its DHCP client, so
we may want to make changes there.  It has a built-in DHCP client, but
seems to prefer an external client if one is available.

(Of course, this conversation may already be taking place, but if so
I've missed it.  Please feel free to point me in the right direction.)


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: