Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:15:44 +0900
From: <Nobumichi.Ozoe@jp.yokogawa.com>
Subject: [users:00832] Re: DHCPv6_Self_test_P2_1_0_10 Test case Problem
To: <ryang@redhat.com>
Cc: <users@tahi.org>
Message-Id: <44C6761D700E0F459CEB255EF80380D80120C9D606BC@EXMAIL01.jp.ykgw.net>
In-Reply-To: <1217488164.13357.30.camel@excalibur>
X-Mail-Count: 00832


Hi Yang,

Each test case, only DNS Recursive Name Server option is configured on the Server.

Best regards,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yang Ren [mailto:ryang@redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 4:09 PM
> To: users@tahi.org
> Subject: [users:00831] DHCPv6_Self_test_P2_1_0_10 Test case Problem
>
> Hi all,
>
>    I'm running DHCPv6_Self_test. When I run it in server mode
> it always returns two failures:
> RFC3646 -> 4 -> Part A :Returning of DNS Recursive Name Server option
> RFC3736 -> 19 -> Part A :Returning of DNS Recursive Name Server option
>
> The reasons both are
> "Opt_DHCPv6_DNS_SearchList found
>  NG: The unexpected option is exist"
>
> Both test cases send request message with optioncode(23,24) I
> think the Reply should contain Opt_DHCPv6_DNS_SearchList(option 24).
>
> But the test case shows:
> # check Options
> if (0 != options_exist(\%rep2, ($CMP_DNS_SVR))){
>         dhcpExitError("<B>The expected option is not
> exist</B><BR>"); } if (0 == options_exist(\%rep2, ($CMP_DNS_LST))){
>         dhcpExitError("<B>The unexpected option is
> exist</B><BR>"); } Rather than "if (0 == options ... The
> unexpected option is exist", should it be "if (0 != options
> ... Opt_DHCPv6_DNS_SearchList does not exist"?
>
> I didn't see any part which tell me in some case a server
> should  reply a message without Opt_DHCPv6_DNS_SearchList if
> get a request with optioncode 24 in rfc
>
> Could someone please provide more with regards to this?
>
> Thanks
> Yang Ren
>
>
>