Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

Bug 1133839

Summary: [dhclient -6] infinite preferred/valid lifetime is represented as -1
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Reporter: Jiri Popelka <jpopelka>
Component: dhcpAssignee: Jiri Popelka <jpopelka>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Release Test Team <release-test-team-automation>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 7.0CC: fpokorny, ljozsa, ovasik, praiskup
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: Patch
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: dhcp-4.2.5-30.el7 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Cause DHCPv6 client tries to obtain a IPv6 address lease from DHCPv6 server, which is configured to offer leases with infinite preferred/valid lifetime. Consequence Client doesn't use obtained address. Fix Bug in DHCPv6 client code was fixed. Result The client uses obtained address.
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-03-05 10:36:15 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
possible bugfix none

Description Jiri Popelka 2014-08-26 08:59:45 UTC
Steps to Reproduce:
1. configure dhcpv6 server to offer leases with infinite preferred/valid lifetime
default-lease-time infinite;
preferred-lifetime infinite;
2. try to get a lease on client machine


Actual results:
dhclient-script thinks the lifetime is -1 and runs:

ip -6 addr add <ipv6 addr> dev <dev> scope global valid_lft -1 preferred_lft -1
Error: argument "-1" is wrong: valid_lft value

the address is therefore not added

Expected results:
dhclient-script runs:
ip -6 addr add <ipv6 addr> dev <dev> scope global valid_lft 4294967295 preferred_lft 4294967295

Additional info:
there's a workaround:
dh6config() {
+    [[ "${new_max_life}" -eq -1 ]] && new_max_life="forever"
+    [[ "${new_preferred_life}" -eq -1 ]] && new_preferred_life="forever"

Comment 1 FridolĂ­n PokornĂ˝ 2014-09-02 14:10:15 UTC
Created attachment 933782 [details]
possible bugfix

Comment 4 Ladislav Jozsa 2015-01-11 22:43:50 UTC
Verified with dhclient-4.2.5-35.el7.x86_64. Error message is not longer shown and the lease is successfully obtained even with preferred/valid lft set to infinite.

Comment 6 errata-xmlrpc 2015-03-05 10:36:15 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2015-0450.html