themiron at mail.ru
Sat Oct 12 10:48:41 BST 2013
Thanks for the implementation, works well with one issue is still there
RDNSS & DNS Search List RA options contain lifetimes calculated from
MaxRtrAdvInterval, where MaxRtrAdvInterval = <ra-interval>, and
MinRtrAdvInterval = 3/4*<ra-interval>
Since, there's no way to specify MinRtrAdvInterval & MaxRtrAdvInterval (as I
proposed before), RDNSS & DNS Search List lifetimes always equal
So, if <ra-interval> is small, like 10sec, that lifetimes are small too,
just 20sec, without any connection to <router lifetime>. Hosts may refresh
RDNSS info with RS packets and trigger solicited RA answers in addition to
existing unsolicited RA packets.
In the same time, with working DHCPv6 stateless/full lifetime is taken from
dhcp-range, 600 sec as min.
In radvd, MinRtrAdvInterval, MaxRtrAdvInterval, DefaultLifetime and other
lifetimes can be set via conf file,
In dnsmasq they are automatic, guess automatic needs to be tuned up.
What do you think?
Best Regards, Vladislav Grishenko
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Kelley [mailto:simon at thekelleys.org.uk]
> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 2:01 AM
> To: Vladislav Grishenko
> Cc: dnsmasq-discuss at lists.thekelleys.org.uk
> Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] gatway
> On 08/10/13 12:09, Vladislav Grishenko wrote:
> >> From: Simon Kelley
> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 4:20 PM On 06/10/13 11:32, Vladislav
> >> Grishenko wrote:
> >>> Hi, RFC4861 says:
> >>> A router might want to send Router Advertisements without
> > advertising
> >>> itself as a default router. For instance, a router might
> >>> prefixes for stateless address autoconfiguration while not
> >>> wishing
> > to
> >>> forward packets. Such a router sets the Router Lifetime field in
> >>> outgoing advertisements to zero.
> >>>>> is it possible to tell dnsmasq not to announce itself as router?
> >>> So , yes, it's theoretically possible.
> >> That's good information, thanks. In answer to the next question, no,
> >> it's
> > not
> >> possible to configure dnsmasq to send Router Lifetime == 0.
> >> The lifetime, in dhcp-range is used to calculate the lifetimes for
> > prefixes, no
> >> the router lifetime. In fact the router lifetime is always advertised
> >> as
> > 1800
> >> seconds, I think.
> >> Since this is a per-broadcast domain thing, and not per prefix thing,
> >> it
> > needs
> >> to be associated with an interface.
> >> Simplest would be
> >> no-router-interface=<interface>[,<interface>,....]
> >> to set the interfaces that get router lifetime of zero.
> >> More complex would be to allow explict setting of the router lifetime
> >> per interface, that would have to be linked to the RA frequency: you
> >> wouldn't want a router expiring before it could be re-advertised.
> > No-router-interface is simplest, and adds more option to control RA.
> > Currently we have already:
> > --dhcp-range=...ra-only|slaac|ra-names...
> > --enable-ra
> > --force-fast-ra
> > What if to logically split options to dhcp*-related and to
> > --dhcp-range=
> > Sets only DHCP range/RA prefix parameters (including
> > lease/prefix/rdnss/domain lifetimes), but not RA timeouts
> > --enable-ra=<interface>[,<interface>,...][,AdvDefaultLifetime][,MinRtr
> > AdvInt
> > erval,MaxRtrAdvInterval]
> > Sets only RA timouts, if params absent - use defaults, 600 as max,
> > 1/3*600 as min.
> > With this, both min& max can be configured, As per RFC,
> > max should be in range 4-1800 secodns, default 600
> > min should be in range 3-3/4*max, default 1/3*max, if max>=9,
> > otherwise equal to max
> > With this approach, --no-router-interface will be alias of
> > --enable-ra=interface,0
> > And --force-fast-ra will be an alias of
> > --enable-ra=interface,1800,5,20
> > Also, current code uses 600 as max, and 3/4*max as min ra intervals,
> > what fits RFC, bit, guessб isn't optimal, too big min delay.
> > As for startup advertisements and force-fast-ra, interval is 5-20, but
> > can be limited to range
> > MIN_DELAY_BETWEEN_RAS-MAX_INITIAL_RTR_ADVERT_INTERVAL, 3 and
> > respectively as RFC suggests Since RA can be very frequent, is it ever
> > worth to log with LOG_INFO level every unsolicited RTR-ADVERT? It just
> > floods syslog and has no other meaning in my opinion.
> > Best Regards, Vladislav Grishenko
> OK, I just committed my take on this, which is --ra-param option, and
> removed --force-fast-ra
> Set non-default values for router advertisements sent
> via an interface. The priority field for the router
> may be altered from the default of medium with eg
> --ra-param=eth0,high. The interval between router
> advertisements may be set (in seconds) with --ra-
> param=eth0,60. The lifetime of the route may be
> changed or set to zero, which allows a router to
> advertise prefixes but not a route via itself. --ra-
> parm=eth0,0,0 (A value of zero for the interval means
> the default value.) All three parameters may be set at
> once. --ra-param=low,60,1200 The interface field may
> include a wildcard.
> I even added control of router priority as a bonus!
More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss