MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <rt-3.8.6-35146-1404418640-1049.36283-5-0@isc.org>
References: <RT-Ticket-36283@isc.org> <9232b43fab87d09a59793a268fa05c7b@www.isc.org> <rt-3.8.6-35146-1404418640-1049.36283-5-0@isc.org>
Message-ID: <53B5C2ED.30300@ztk-rp.eu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
Subject: Re: [ISC-Bugs #36283] DHCP Server 4.2.2 - Abandoning IP address ....pinged before offer
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 22:54:05 +0200
To: dhcp-bugs@isc.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Rafał Pietrak <rafal@ztk-rp.eu>
RT-Message-ID: <rt-3.8.6-35151-1404420860-910.36283-0-0@isc.org>
Content-Length: 1087

Looking through my logs again I think there may be a problem with 
debian/jessie dhcp-client. Countrary to other hosts, it does send 
DHCPDISCOVER even though it does have earlier assigned IP. In that same 
situation others send DHCPREQUEST.... e.g that client sends DHCPDISCOVER 
despite the fact, that its "ethX" does have "some" address.... and will 
respond to ICMP ping.

So my conclusion for dhcpd would be not to differenciate (much) server 
side processing of received DHCPDISCOVER from received DHCPREQUEST.

Regarding "low priority", pls notice, that these days people don't use 
"long-term / human attended" connection services like ssh. One does not 
notice the problem while using only IMAP or HTTP.

-R


W dniu 03.07.2014 22:17, Shawn Routhier via RT pisze:
> There is an issue about what we should do in this case I just need
> to figure out what will work and be consistent with the specs. As
> we haven't had other complaints about this before I'm assuming
> that it isn't affecting a lot of people - hence the lower priority.
>
> Thank you for the logs.
>
> Shawn
>