Bug 455186
| Summary: | zeroconf route on non-dhcp interface | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jerry Vonau <jvonau3> |
| Component: | initscripts | Assignee: | Bill Nottingham <notting> |
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | 9 | CC: | rvokal |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | i386 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2008-07-15 00:26:43 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
make that: 1. /sbin/ifdown eth0 2. /sbin/ifup eth0 There's no reason to not have the route for static IPs as well. Or am I misunderstanding what you're asking? Ok, lets expand a bit, a dhcp device would be un-configured until it's plugged in and received a lease, while you can have a static ip address for a device that, I would consider to be configured because of the network info, even if not plugged in. If you have 2 or interfaces, one dhcp while the rest are static, the last one to be enabled will get that route, not the newly "configured" dhcp interface, done by a dhcp server. Is that not the point of zeroconf? adding a ipaddr/route to a device that is not configured? Would this not be better added(created?) when dhcp couldn't get/renew a lease? What ip address is used with this 169.254 route? While it is the last interface configured, keying off of DYNCONFIG is the wrong key - after all, you could have your static/dynamic devices ordered in any way. Using the last device is the same algorithm used for gateway; considering that, leaving the code as-is makes sense. |
Description of problem: zeroconf route appears in routing table with no interfaces using dhcp Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): initscripts-8.76.2-1.i386 How reproducible: Look at the any routing table, zeroconf route on the last interface to be enabled. Steps to Reproduce: 1. /sbin/down eth0 2. /sbin/up eth0 3. look at the routing table Actual results: 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth0 scope link Expected results: no zeroconf route Additional info: diff to ifup-eth # Add Zeroconf route. -if [ -z "${NOZEROCONF}" -a "${ISALIAS}" = "no" -a "${REALDEVICE}" != "lo" ]; then +if [ -z "${NOZEROCONF}" -a "${DYNACONFIG}" = "true" -a "${ISALIAS}" = "no" -a "${REALDEVICE}" != "lo" ]; then ip route replace 169.254.0.0/16 dev ${REALDEVICE} fi