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@redhat.com> --- 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 :|