[libvirt] dhcp6, radvd, ip6tables, etc. (update)

[Gene Czarcinski]

On 10/31/2012 09:50 PM, Laine Stump wrote:
> On 10/31/2012 03:11 PM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
>> On 10/31/2012 11:53 AM, Laine Stump wrote:
>>> That's just a safeguard to enforce the ipv4-only status of dhcp in the
>>> current libvirt. Just remove that restriction from the function
>>> virNetworkDefUpdateIP() as a part of your patch adding ipv6 dhcp
>>> support.
>>>
>> OK, removing the ipv4 test has net-update ipv6 working as well as ipv4
>> does.
>>
>> Observation: this is definitely a work-in-progress.  I only tried
>> ip-dhcp-range and ip-dhcp-host.  The ip-dhcp-range produced the
>> expected in the the xml was updated and dnsmasq was restarted.  With
>> ip-dhcp-host, it only did the right thing if the network was down. If
>> it was started, nothing much happened.
> Most likely because, according to what you recently wrote, the dhcp
> hosts file isn't reread when a SIGHUP is sent to dnsmasq.
With the network started, I tried editing its definition and adding dns 
host definitions, when I saved I got a message in syslog that the 
network was defined [networkCreate() had executed].  There is code in 
networkCreate() to go through and crate/update the addnhosts and 
hostsfile which was done.  However, no SIGHUP was issued.  I then did a 
SIGHUP manually and the files were re-read.
>
>> A suggestion, before F18 goes with 0.10.2, I suggest that the virsh
>> man-page be updated.  Currently, you would think that all of the stuff
>> worked.  Clearly, it does not.  At best, users will be confused.  I
>> suggest listing the functions that are planned but not currently
>> implemented.
> A valid point.
>
> Note that it's not vanilla 0.10.2 that's currently in F18, it's the
> 0.20.2-maint branch, which is 0.10.2 plus some bugfixes deemed worthy of
> backporting. Patches can be added to that branch at any time during the
> lifetime of F18 (and even beyond if some other distro is using that
> release for their builds), but they are only bugfixes (adding the
> backend for missing sections could be seen as fixing a bug, if we
> *really* wanted to :-).
I guess I like being a little more straight-forward with the user/customer.
>
>> Speaking of documentation.  This should be updated for DHCPv6:
>> http://libvirt.org/http://libvirt.org/formatnetwork.html and there is
>> docs/http://libvirt.org/formatnetwork.html.in in the git. However, it
>> is not clear what the process is for changing/updating the documentation.
> Just edit formatnetwork.html.in and make that edit a part of the same
> patch that makes the new functionality available. Your patch would be
> NACKed without that anyway.
>
>> Doing a grep on the log does not show a lot of commits being performed
>> on it.
> Any change to the network XML is not accepted for a push unless a change
> to formatnetwork.html.in accompanies it. Any low patch volume on the
> file is due to there being infrequent changes in the XML.
OK, one more thing on the todo list.  I plan to use seamonkey or maybe 
Libreoffice to do the editing.  Any comments/suggestions?

Any other files I should look at for appropriate change documentation?
>
>> While a lot of using IPv6/DHCP6 is straight-forward, there are a
>> couple of twists such as not specifying a MAC address for a v6
>> dhcp-host specification.
>>
>> I know there is some touchiness about this so I am thinking of adding
>> a "special xml keyword" which would switch between radvd and dnsmasq.
> I'm not sure whether that would be appropriate, or to instead have an
> autoconf option that would enact the change at compile time.
If use/non-use of radvd is an issue on different systems, then an 
autoconf options is the way to go.  For testing purpose (not really for 
submission) is the ablity to have one interface use dnsmasq only which 
another interface uses radvd & dnsmasq ... this was intended for testing 
only to make sure that things worked properly.
>
>>
>> BTW, I am assuming this is all post v1.0.0.
> We've been in freeze for the last week, and at this point only simple
> fixes to very serious bugs are being pushed. New functionality is
> definnitely post-1.0.0
>
>>    I have currently completed the dhcp6 patch (net-update was the last
>> piece) but I need to let things work for a while to see if I missed
>> anything.  If anyone wants to look at these patches, I can post them
>> to this list or send them direct.  However, I want to wait until
>> v1.0.0 gets released before submitting them for review, etc.
> You can submit things for review now, they just won't be pushed until
> after the release is cut.
I think I want to do a bit more polishing (and updating documentation) 
before actually submitting.

As things now stand, there are three patches with a forth planned for 
documentation:
1. put dnsmasq parameters into a file.
2. add interface= to dnsmasq parameters
3. add support for dhcp6

Anything involving radvd vs dnsmasq would be a separate issue, separate 
patch, although it would depend on the above patches.