On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 01:16:02PM -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
> With autoaddr enabled, the subnet to be used for the default network
> will be verified/changed at the time the network starts.
>
> Signed-off-by: Laine Stump <laine@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> src/network/default.xml.in | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/network/default.xml.in b/src/network/default.xml.in
> index 08a3632eb6..a01c6d30ae 100644
> --- a/src/network/default.xml.in
> +++ b/src/network/default.xml.in
> @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
> <name>default</name>
> <bridge name='virbr0'/>
> <forward/>
> - <ip address='192.168.122.1' netmask='255.255.255.0'>
> + <ip autoaddr='yes' address='192.168.122.1' netmask='255.255.255.0'>
> <dhcp>
> <range start='192.168.122.2' end='192.168.122.254'/>
> </dhcp>
What I find unsettling is that we're providing an address + netmask
here, along with a DHCP range, but there's no guarantee any of these
are within the start+end addresses in network.conf
I'm thinking that perhaps autoaddr='yes' should be mutually exclusive
with existence of an explicit address + DHCP range. ie only permit
<ip autoaddr='yes'>
<dhcp/>
</ip>
on the basis that if someone wants explicit control over the DHCP
range, then they probably shouldn't be relying on auto-addr usage.
With regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
