Description of problem: DHCPv6 addresses all have a /128 netmask, which breaks the check in baremetal-runtimecfg for whether an IP is in the same subnet as the VIP. This causes deployments using IPv6 to fail when starting mdns-publisher because it doesn't know what address to listen on. In the short term we will just assume /64 for IPv6 addresses, but eventually we need to look up the correct netmask and use that.
Verified on 4.4.0-0.ci-2020-03-11-095511 where IPv6 cluster deployment finished successfully [root@titan35 ~]# virsh net-dhcp-leases baremetal Expiry Time MAC address Protocol IP address Hostname Client ID or DUID ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2020-03-12 11:59:00 52:54:00:02:4d:ae ipv6 fd2e:6f44:5dd8:c956::112/64 master-2 00:03:00:01:52:54:00:02:4d:ae 2020-03-12 12:09:30 52:54:00:13:42:eb ipv6 fd2e:6f44:5dd8:c956::14f/64 provisionhost-0 00:03:00:01:52:54:00:13:42:eb 2020-03-12 11:51:42 52:54:00:44:d1:fc ipv6 fd2e:6f44:5dd8:c956::145/64 worker-0 00:03:00:01:52:54:00:44:d1:fc 2020-03-12 11:58:56 52:54:00:5a:16:6d ipv6 fd2e:6f44:5dd8:c956::11c/64 master-1 00:03:00:01:52:54:00:5a:16:6d 2020-03-12 12:01:23 52:54:00:f6:53:13 ipv6 fd2e:6f44:5dd8:c956::150/64 master-0 00:03:00:01:52:54:00:f6:53:13 2020-03-12 11:50:25 52:54:00:fb:3e:67 ipv6 fd2e:6f44:5dd8:c956::11d/64 worker-1 00:03:00:01:52:54:00:fb:3e:67
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://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2020:0581