Re: Testing of rapid_commit patch

[Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2357 bytes --]

Hello,

Thanks for testing this in production. Good to know this all works.

> On 29 Nov 2024, at 11:21, Adolf Belka <adolf.belka(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Michael,
> 
> I had previously tested your rapid_commit patch on my vm network system. However as that network does not have a problem with the rapid_commit option it was not the best test.
> 
> I said that i would test it out on my production system after the visit to my family. I have now got around to that.
> 
> My new ISP, that bought out the very good technically based ISP I used to have, is one of the ones that has a DHCP server that just times out if you have the rapid_commit option in the dhcpcd config file.
> 
> So I updated my production IPFire to Core-Update 190 Development Build: master/1e2abd66
> 
> After rebooting the connection was lost as the rapid_commit option is on by default.
> 
> I then ran the setup program and unchecked the rapid commit box on the red interface and then rebooted and the connection  was running.
> 
> Another reboot still had the connection running.
> 
> So I can confirm that the  patch is working .
> 
> The only thing that came to mind is when we do the update people who have removed or commented out the rapid_commit option in dhcpcd.conf will lose their connection.
> 
> So either
> 
> * we need to have the update check if the rapid_commit option has been commented out or has been removed and then disable the rapid commit option for the red interface.
> 
> or
> 
> * we need to make sure that it is well communicated that anyone who has disabled the rapid_commit option needs to run the setup program after the upgrade (maybe before the reboot) to disable the option for the red interface.

If we wanted to be really fancy we could check if someone has modified the configuration file and if so we can automatically set the setting in /var/ipfire/ethernet/settings. I am not sure how reliable this would be, but it is an option.

> We can discuss this at our next conf call meeting on 3rd or 4th Dec.

We need to bring more things back to the list because there are currently only so few people joining the call. I would also prefer to sort things out sooner on the list if possible and keep the call as free as possible for more general discussion.

-Michael

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Adolf.
>