Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

NS was invented for. Manually managing host files > > > is a pain after only a few hosts. Add one machine, and you have to > > > update 5,10,20,[...] host files. > > > > So the last change I made was mid-November, for adding a new laptop. > > I only change the D

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

problems here. I don't think DNS was invented for > > > resolving two dozen non-hierachical names on one site. > > > > That's exactly what DNS was invented for. Manually managing host files > > is a pain after only a few hosts. Add one machine, and you have to

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

7;s exactly what DNS was invented for. Manually managing host files > is a pain after only a few hosts. Add one machine, and you have to > update 5,10,20,[...] host files. So the last change I made was mid-November, for adding a new laptop. I only change the DHCP when all my hosts are run

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

ritten, we were already seeing convergence of names for common services (mail, telnet, ftp, etc.). > > For various reasons I'd much rather configure a static IP in this > > situation than set up a reservation on the dhcp server. Among other > > things, in a small network the b

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

there by the installer for the more common case where a machine doesn't > > > have a fixed LAN IP address. Most home or workplace computers these > > > days will get their addresses from DHCP without a reservation, so their > > > internal addresses may vary. >

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

dress. Most home or workplace computers these days will get their addresses from DHCP without a reservation, so their internal addresses may vary. And that means that two machines can't find each other unless the DHCP server is also a DNS server. Or you set up and run your own. Or you use m

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

common case where a machine doesn't > have a fixed LAN IP address. Most home or workplace computers these > days will get their addresses from DHCP without a reservation, so their > internal addresses may vary. And that means that two machines can't find each other unless the D

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

on case where a machine doesn't > have a fixed LAN IP address. Most home or workplace computers these > days will get their addresses from DHCP without a reservation, so their > internal addresses may vary. > > 127.0.1.1 is used when a fixed LAN IP address isn't available.

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 10:28:24PM -0500, David Wright wrote: I don't see the point in leaving it there. If you want to send something to coyote.coyote.den, why do you want the LAN address when 127.0.1.1 is just as good. If the line is correct, it does nothing; if it's incorrect, it can cause har

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re:Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

l copy. Bear in mind that the same holds true for each machine on your LAN, so the hosts file will be different for each one. My master list, which I reconcile with the router's DHCP server Reservation List, is installed onto a system with a line like: The router is, I believe, running d

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who: Bookworm v.Trixie

On 3/31/25 13:55, David Wright wrote: On Mon 31 Mar 2025 at 11:19:30 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: The dns problem is separate I guess, but does bring up my other pet peeve. That is that no one at debian considers the effect on dns to those of us who have been using hosts files for local dns sinc

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re:Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On 4/3/25 07:49, Dan Purgert wrote: On Apr 02, 2025, David Wright wrote: On Wed 02 Apr 2025 at 09:12:24 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: [...] Experimenting I find the duplication does not seem to generate an error, other than I now had to ping itself by address, since the name is now found at 127.

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do withRe:Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On 4/4/25 11:47, John Hasler wrote: Gene writes: Which is to fix the reason for a 30 second all system freeze of the system when trying to access a file I own, or want to create, in my /home/me directory. This happens only in that directory and only when you own the file? I think its a bit mo

Beware of Pocket's off-list goading (Was Re: DHCP and static addresses)

Hi, On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 09:48:32AM -0400, Dan Purgert wrote: > Congrats? What point are you trying to make? Pocket also contacted me. As neither of those emails reached the list I assume they have been banned and are trying to goad people in to group-reply back onto the list for them. Thank

Re: IPv6 and loopback addresses (was Re: DHCP and static addresses)

Hi, On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 05:21:45AM -0400, gene heskett wrote: > On 4/3/25 13:39, Andy Smith wrote: > > Historically we do not get very far here when talking about IPv6 with > > Gene. > True Andy, but there's no ipv6 within 100 miles of me. The Linux kernel comes with IPv6 on every interface (

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re:Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 10:46:35 -0500, John Hasler wrote: > Gene writes: > > Which is to fix the reason for a 30 second all system freeze of the > > system when trying to access a file I own, or want to create, in my > > /home/me directory. > > This happens only in that directory and only when yo

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re:Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

Gene writes: > Which is to fix the reason for a 30 second all system freeze of the > system when trying to access a file I own, or want to create, in my > /home/me directory. This happens only in that directory and only when you own the file? -- John Hasler j...@sugarbit.com Elmwood, WI USA

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re:Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On 4/4/25 06:10, Dan Purgert wrote: On Apr 03, 2025, Greg wrote: On 2025-04-03, Dan Purgert wrote: That's what you want: as the address is in the 127.0.0.0 network, pinging it will ping itself, and it gets a reply. It doesn't require your LAN to be set up, and AIUI it's like localhost (127.0.

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do withRe:Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On 4/4/25 05:57, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 05:17:24AM -0400, gene heskett wrote: On 4/3/25 09:29, Greg wrote: On 2025-04-03, Dan Purgert wrote: That's what you want: as the address is in the 127.0.0.0 network, pinging it will ping itself, and it gets a reply. It doesn't

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Apr 04, 2025, poc...@homemail.com wrote: > > > > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2025 at 6:10 AM > > From: "Dan Purgert" > > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > > Subject: Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: > > Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Apr 04, 2025, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote: > Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > I'm just going to assume that it worked similarly to traditional X > > sessions (e.g. the ones on HP-UX), where it looked up the system's > > hostname, and used whatever IP address that returned for connections > > be

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

Greg Wooledge wrote: > I'm just going to assume that it worked similarly to traditional X > sessions (e.g. the ones on HP-UX), where it looked up the system's > hostname, and used whatever IP address that returned for connections > between the X client and server. I'm confused. Traditional X ses

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Apr 03, 2025, Greg wrote: > On 2025-04-03, Dan Purgert wrote: > > >> That's what you want: as the address is in the 127.0.0.0 network, > >> pinging it will ping itself, and it gets a reply. It doesn't > >> require your LAN to be set up, and AIUI it's like localhost > >> (127.0.0.1) in that it

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re:Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 05:17:24AM -0400, gene heskett wrote: > On 4/3/25 09:29, Greg wrote: > > On 2025-04-03, Dan Purgert wrote: > > > > > > That's what you want: as the address is in the 127.0.0.0 network, > > > > pinging it will ping itself, and it gets a reply. It doesn't > > > > require you

Re: IPv6 and loopback addresses (was Re: DHCP and static addresses)

On 4/3/25 13:39, Andy Smith wrote: Hi, On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 01:28:43PM -, Greg wrote: On 2025-04-03, Dan Purgert wrote: Indeed, the entirety of 127.0.0.0/8 is the virtual loopback adapter (i.e. "localhost"). I thought IPV6 opened up the flood gates of assigning "real" ip addresses In

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re:Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On 4/3/25 09:29, Greg wrote: On 2025-04-03, Dan Purgert wrote: That's what you want: as the address is in the 127.0.0.0 network, pinging it will ping itself, and it gets a reply. It doesn't require your LAN to be set up, and AIUI it's like localhost (127.0.0.1) in that it doesn't touch the net

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 22:15:57 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > Yeah, I'm going to lookup what Stevens has to say about the hosts file > in TCP/IP Illustrated. I need to figure out where the confusion lies. Here's what the Debian manual has to say about it:

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 10:13 PM Michael Stone wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 12:59:19PM -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > >I think the idea is, software can always use 127.0.1.1 to find the > >host's fully qualified domain name, without the need to know real IP > >address. (And what to do with mu

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 12:59:19PM -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: I think the idea is, software can always use 127.0.1.1 to find the host's fully qualified domain name, without the need to know real IP address. (And what to do with multihomed hosts?) It literally doesn't matter. The host knows it

IPv6 and loopback addresses (was Re: DHCP and static addresses)

Hi, On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 01:28:43PM -, Greg wrote: > On 2025-04-03, Dan Purgert wrote: > > Indeed, the entirety of 127.0.0.0/8 is the virtual loopback adapter > > (i.e. "localhost"). > > I thought IPV6 opened up the flood gates of assigning "real" ip > addresses In IPv6 you still need lo

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 12:59:19 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > I think the idea is, software can always use 127.0.1.1 to find the > host's fully qualified domain name, No. Absolutely not. You have it exactly backwards. The purpose of putting the "127.0.1.1 my_hostname" line in /etc/hosts by de

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Apr 02, 2025, David Wright wrote: > On Wed 02 Apr 2025 at 09:12:24 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: > > [...] > > Experimenting I find the duplication does not seem to generate an > > error, other than I now had to ping itself by address, since the name > > is now found at 127.0.1.1 by pings lookup?

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re:Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

ters these days will get their addresses from DHCP without a reservation, so their internal addresses may vary. 127.0.1.1 is used when a fixed LAN IP address isn't available. But if a fixed LAN IP address *is* assigned, that should be used instead. In Gene's case, where all the addressing

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On 2025-04-03, Dan Purgert wrote: >> That's what you want: as the address is in the 127.0.0.0 network, >> pinging it will ping itself, and it gets a reply. It doesn't >> require your LAN to be set up, and AIUI it's like localhost >> (127.0.0.1) in that it doesn't touch the network hardware. > > I

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

ays will get their addresses from DHCP without a reservation, so their internal addresses may vary. 127.0.1.1 is used when a fixed LAN IP address isn't available. But if a fixed LAN IP address *is* assigned, that should be used instead. In Gene's case, where all the addressing

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

And coyote's own hosts file can't be seen by other machines trying to find coyote: they will use their local copy. Bear in mind that the same holds true for each machine on your LAN, so the hosts file will be different for each one. My master list, which I reconcile with the router's

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On 4/2/25 01:28, David Wright wrote: On Tue 01 Apr 2025 at 04:58:27 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: On 3/31/25 23:02, David Wright wrote: On Mon 31 Mar 2025 at 16:35:58 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: On 3/31/25 13:55, David Wright wrote: I don't know why you have problems with using /etc/hosts for

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who: Bookwormv.Trixie

On Tue 01 Apr 2025 at 04:58:27 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: > On 3/31/25 23:02, David Wright wrote: > > On Mon 31 Mar 2025 at 16:35:58 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: > > > On 3/31/25 13:55, David Wright wrote: > > > > I don't know why you have problems with using /etc/hosts for lookups > > > > on you

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 12:25:36PM -0400, gene heskett wrote: > On 4/1/25 08:59, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 01:36:21PM +0100, mick.crane wrote: > > > On 2025-04-01 13:21, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 12:42:46PM +0100, mick.crane wrote: > > > > >

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who: Bookwormv.Trixie

On 2025-04-01 13:21, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 12:42:46PM +0100, mick.crane wrote: [...] the spaces look wrong to me If you mean those: 192.168.71.122 bpi51e5p.coyote.den bpi51 e5p #3dprinter ^^^ ... 192.168.71.121

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who:Bookwormv.Trixie

On 4/1/25 08:59, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 01:36:21PM +0100, mick.crane wrote: On 2025-04-01 13:21, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 12:42:46PM +0100, mick.crane wrote: [...] the spaces look wrong to me If you mean those: 192.168.71.122 bpi51e5p.coyot

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who: Bookwormv.Trixie

On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 12:42:46PM +0100, mick.crane wrote: [...] > the spaces look wrong to me If you mean those: > 192.168.71.122 bpi51e5p.coyote.den bpi51 e5p #3dprinter ^^^ > ... > 192.168.71.121 mkspi.coyote.denmkspi xmax3 # 3dpri

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who: Bookwormv.Trixie

On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 01:36:21PM +0100, mick.crane wrote: > On 2025-04-01 13:21, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 12:42:46PM +0100, mick.crane wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > the spaces look wrong to me > > > > If you mean those: > > > > > 192.168.71.122 bpi51e5p.coyote.den

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who: Bookwormv.Trixie

On 2025-04-01 09:58, gene heskett wrote: 127.0.0.1   localhost 192.168.71.1    router.coyote.den   router # dd-wrt 192.168.71.2    amanda.coyote.den   amanda # backup under construction 192.168.71.3    coyote.coyote.den   coyote # this big tower 192.168.71.4    sixty40.coyote.d

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who: Bookwormv.Trixie

On 3/31/25 23:02, David Wright wrote: On Mon 31 Mar 2025 at 16:35:58 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: On 3/31/25 13:55, David Wright wrote: I don't know why you have problems with using /etc/hosts for lookups on your LAN. I use it here without any problems, and it has to work because there's no DNS

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who: Bookworm v.Trixie

On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 10:01:37PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Mon 31 Mar 2025 at 16:35:58 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: > > On 3/31/25 13:55, David Wright wrote: > > > I don't know why you have problems with using /etc/hosts for lookups > > > on your LAN. I use it here without any problems, and

Re: DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who: Bookworm v.Trixie

On Mon 31 Mar 2025 at 16:35:58 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: > On 3/31/25 13:55, David Wright wrote: > > I don't know why you have problems with using /etc/hosts for lookups > > on your LAN. I use it here without any problems, and it has to work > > because there's no DNS server in my router (too ch

DHCP and static addresses, nothing to do with Re: Who: Bookworm v. Trixie

On Mon 31 Mar 2025 at 11:19:30 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: > The dns problem is separate I guess, but does bring up my other pet > peeve. That is that no one at debian considers the effect on dns to > those of us who have been using hosts files for local dns since back > in the late 90's  I have n

Re: How to disable the dhcp of my machine?

On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 08:50:58AM +0200, Roger Price wrote: > On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, William Torrez Corea wrote: > > > I want to assign a static ip but the dhcp then takes the order and changes > > the configuration. > > Perhaps I misunderstand your question, but isn&

Re: How to disable the dhcp of my machine?

On Sat, 12 Oct 2024, William Torrez Corea wrote: I want to assign a static ip but the dhcp then takes the order and changes the configuration. Perhaps I misunderstand your question, but isn't this a function of the router?, not the dhcp client in your machine. Routers often

Re: How to disable the dhcp of my machine?

On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 19:00:08 -0600, William Torrez Corea wrote: > I want to assign a static ip but the dhcp then takes the order and changes > the configuration. OK. Let's say you're using /etc/network/interfaces and you have the default configuration that the installer

How to disable the dhcp of my machine?

I want to assign a static ip but the dhcp then takes the order and changes the configuration. -- With kindest regards, William. *Larry Wall invented a messy programming language -- and changed the face of the Web*

Re: Vlan and DHCP

basti writes: > Whats wrong there? > Can someone put me in the wright direction? Must you use kea-dhcp? I researched a similar situation (I think, I'm not 100% from your description) and dnsmasq as DHCP server can handle this.

Vlan and DHCP

Hello, maybe a bit off topic. The goal is to have a central DHCP/DNS server for multiple IP ranges in the same network. - LAN has 192.168.30.0/24 - guest should have 10.10.10.0/24 At the moment LAN and guest has different interfaces but i have to change this. A new wifi repeater / AP is

Re: DHCP Problem

On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 05:55:50 +0100 wrote: > Wait a sec: before the clients get an answer from the DHCP server, > they don't have any route (at least not for the network in question), > so it doesn't make sense poking at them with ip route and things. > They send thei

Re: DHCP Problem

On Sun, Dec 03, 2023 at 12:30:53PM -0700, Charles Curley wrote: > I am installing a new router which seems to work well so far. > > I have changed the DHCP server to use the new router's address, and shut > the server down and restarted it. Existing clients insist on using the &g

Re: DHCP Problem, but where

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 22:32:59 -0500 Jeffrey Walton wrote: > The "restart your dhcp clients" may have a sharp edge. Sometimes the > clients have a touch of resiliency or hardening added so they contact > their original dhcp server, and not a [possibly] rogue server setup by >

Re: DHCP Problem

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 12:30:53 -0700 Charles Curley wrote: > I am installing a new router which seems to work well so far. > > I have changed the DHCP server to use the new router's address, and > shut the server down and restarted it. Existing clients insist on > using the o

Re: DHCP Problem, but where

On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 9:57 PM jeremy ardley wrote: > > > On 4/12/23 05:18, Geert Stappers wrote: > > That triggered me to ask "Has the DHCP server been restarted?" > > > The default behaviour of most dhcp clients when they can't connect to a > dhcp s

Re: goose DHCP clients to new address Was: DHCP Problem

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 17:18:23 -0500 Jeffrey Walton wrote: > I don't know about Linux clients, but in the past, Windows clients > used to try to connect to the previous DHCP server for its lease info. > If the old DHCP server is still available (on the old router?), then > the clie

Re: goose DHCP clients to new address Was: DHCP Problem

g the old router. > > > The DHCProtocol has "release" for such goosing. > > At DHCPclient do "stop DHCP", over the wire goes DHCPRELEASE [0] > > The DHCPclient should forget ( "release" ) previous settings. > > At DHCPclient do "start DHCP&

Re: goose DHCP clients to new address Was: DHCP Problem

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 22:14:51 +0100 Geert Stappers wrote: > I assume that the previous router is disconnected from the LAN. No. Until I solve this problem (and a few others), I will have clients using the old router. > The DHCProtocol has "release" for such goosing. > At DHCPc

Re: DHCP Problem, but where

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 22:18:22 +0100 Geert Stappers wrote: > Has the DHCP server been restarted? Yes. -- Does anybody read signatures any more? https://charlescurley.com https://charlescurley.com/blog/

Re: DHCP Problem, but where

On 4/12/23 05:18, Geert Stappers wrote: That triggered me to ask "Has the DHCP server been restarted?" The default behaviour of most dhcp clients when they can't connect to a dhcp server is to maintain the settings from any previous lease. A second default behaviour is for

Re: DHCP Problem

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 20:56:20 +0100 Marco Moock wrote: > Did you check with a sniffer that the answer from the DHCP includes > the new router address? Not with a sniffer, but I did check the lease file. Neither the router address nor the various lease times changed. -- Does anybod

Re: DHCP Problem, but where

On Sun, Dec 03, 2023 at 04:03:39PM -0500, Henning Follmann wrote: > > On Dec 3, 2023, at 14:31, Charles Curley wrote: > > > > I am installing a new router which seems to work well so far. > > > > I have changed the DHCP server to use the new router's addres

goose DHCP clients to new address Was: DHCP Problem

On Sun, Dec 03, 2023 at 12:30:53PM -0700, Charles Curley wrote: > I am installing a new router which seems to work well so far. I assume that the previous router is disconnected from the LAN. > I have changed the DHCP server to use the new router's address, and shut > the s

Re: DHCP Problem

> On Dec 3, 2023, at 14:31, Charles Curley > wrote: > > I am installing a new router which seems to work well so far. > > I have changed the DHCP server to use the new router's address, and shut > the server down and restarted it. Existing clients insist on usi

Re: DHCP Problem

Am 03.12.2023 um 12:30:53 Uhr schrieb Charles Curley: > I have changed the DHCP server to use the new router's address, and > shut the server down and restarted it. Existing clients insist on > using the old router anyway. Is there any way to goose clients into > using the

DHCP Problem

I am installing a new router which seems to work well so far. I have changed the DHCP server to use the new router's address, and shut the server down and restarted it. Existing clients insist on using the old router anyway. Is there any way to goose clients into using the new one sho

Re: Bullseye (Debian11) doesn't renew dhcp lease

On 23.03.2023 09:36, h...@hanswkraus.com wrote: Hi, a pc with a plain vanilla Debian11 doesn't renew the dhcp lease automatically, I have to do it per hand (systemctl stop ifup@$1.service && systemctl start ifup@$1.service). The "/var/lib/dhcp/dhclient

Bullseye (Debian11) doesn't renew dhcp lease

Hi, a pc with a plain vanilla Debian11 doesn't renew the dhcp lease automatically, I have to do it per hand (systemctl stop ifup@$1.service && systemctl start ifup@$1.service). The "/var/lib/dhcp/dhclient.lan0.leases" file:

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

john doe writes: [...] >> > > You might be better off asking this on the appropriate mailing list! :) I asked: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2022-May/047889.html My impressions: 1. Scripts called by dhcp client are "BAD THING" (according to sys

Re: SUCESSFUL INSTALL - was [Discovering DHCP hostname during original system installation]

On 2022-06-02, David Wright wrote: > >> I still owe David a response to his last post. > > No need. The above clears up the point made in the body of your OP, > and I have nothing more to add on the Subject line, as what I've > already posted pretty much exhausts my kno

Re: SUCESSFUL INSTALL - was [Discovering DHCP hostname during original system installation]

post. No need. The above clears up the point made in the body of your OP, and I have nothing more to add on the Subject line, as what I've already posted pretty much exhausts my knowledge of DHCP. Cheers, David.

SUCESSFUL INSTALL - was [Discovering DHCP hostname during original system installation]

On 05/31/2022 08:13 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: I'm using firmware-11.3.0-amd64-netinst.iso to install Debian onto a Lenovo T510 [Thinkpad]. I know the netinstaller works on this laptop as I have done a successful install when within range of of local library's wifi and the installer is success

Re: Discovering DHCP hostname during original system installation

es > requiring non-free drivers. Again, the OP never made any mention of this. > I tried to succinctly state MY topic in the Subject line. > When The DHCP auto-detection during install fails, > "How do I manually discover DHCP [server] hostname(s)?" Ah, now, I recognise

Re: Discovering DHCP hostname during original system installation

On Wed 01 Jun 2022 at 06:32:07 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote: [...] > As stated in this post the particular machine is dedicated to > EXPERIMENTATION. The goal of the experimentation is to be able to describe > how the Debian installation process could simultaneously be simpler and more > versatile

Re: Discovering DHCP hostname during original system installation

On 05/31/2022 02:00 PM, Richard Owlett wrote: *SNIP* I am doing a fresh install from home using an Alcatel Linkzone to connect to my T-mobile account. I have had no problems doing this with standard netinstallers. ? That seems to be a new interpretation of the thread: https://lists.debian.

Re: Discovering DHCP hostname during original system installation

read might be something about official vs firmware rather than, say wifi vs ethernet in the normal scenario, or wifi vs some sort of ?USB link in your case. No ;/ I tried to succinctly state MY topic in the Subject line. When The DHCP auto-detection during install fails, "How do I manually discov

Re: Discovering DHCP hostname during original system installation

On Tue 31 May 2022 at 14:00:51 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote: > On 05/31/2022 11:13 AM, David Wright wrote: > > On Tue 31 May 2022 at 08:13:57 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote: > > > I'm using firmware-11.3.0-amd64-netinst.iso to install Debian onto a > > > Lenovo T510 [Thinkpad]. > > > > ✓ > > > >

Re: Discovering DHCP hostname during original system installation

On 05/31/2022 11:13 AM, David Wright wrote: On Tue 31 May 2022 at 08:13:57 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote: I'm using firmware-11.3.0-amd64-netinst.iso to install Debian onto a Lenovo T510 [Thinkpad]. ✓ I know the netinstaller works on this laptop as I have done a successful install when withi

Re: Discovering DHCP hostname during original system installation

On Tue 31 May 2022 at 08:13:57 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote: > I'm using firmware-11.3.0-amd64-netinst.iso to install Debian onto a > Lenovo T510 [Thinkpad]. ✓ > I know the netinstaller works on this laptop as I have done a > successful install when within range of of local library's wifi and >

Discovering DHCP hostname during original system installation

I'm using firmware-11.3.0-amd64-netinst.iso to install Debian onto a Lenovo T510 [Thinkpad]. I know the netinstaller works on this laptop as I have done a successful install when within range of of local library's wifi and the installer is successfully detecting multiple local wifi sources.

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

network setup. But in my case udhcpc seems to be the only DHCP client that will talk to the LTE module in my router, others just balk and whine.

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

On 2022-05-08 11:19:33 +0800, Jeremy Ardley wrote: > Of note: Using systemd-networkd you should not use NetworkManager or > networking services. I think both use the ISC dhcp client And what about NetworkManager users? Note: it has its own internal DHCP client, but it is not robust on

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

On 5/8/2022 6:33 PM, Kamil Jońca wrote: Kamil Jońca writes: [...] But systemd-networkd also has a huge number of configuration options that may do what you want anyway https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.network.html Hm. Can you create bridge without ports with systemd

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

Kamil Jońca writes: [...] >> >> But systemd-networkd also has a huge number of configuration options >> that may do what you want anyway >> >> https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.network.html > > Hm. Can you create bridge without ports with systemd-networkd? > i.e. > Another

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

On Sun, May 08, 2022 at 04:09:27PM +0200, Oliver Schoede wrote: Alternatively there's dhcpcd5, Be careful with this one unless you have a simple network configuration--by default it will attempt to get addresses on all interfaces that don't have them, not only ones you set to dhc

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

On Sun, 8 May 2022 09:20:25 -0400 Dan Ritter wrote: > Stefan Monnier wrote: > > Rick Thomas [2022-05-07 19:47:57] wrote: > > > According to the ISC webpage: > > >> ISC has ended development on the ISC DHCP client as of early > > >> 2022. This client

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

Stefan Monnier wrote: > Rick Thomas [2022-05-07 19:47:57] wrote: > > According to the ISC webpage: > >> ISC has ended development on the ISC DHCP client as of early 2022. > >> This client implementation is no longer maintained and should not be > >> used in pr

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

On 2022-05-08 at 07:06, Rick Thomas wrote: > On Sat, May 7, 2022, at 7:47 PM, Rick Thomas wrote: > >> According to the ISC webpage: >> >>> ISC has ended development on the ISC DHCP client as of early >>> 2022. This client implementation is no longer main

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

On Sat, May 7, 2022, at 7:47 PM, Rick Thomas wrote: > According to the ISC webpage: > >> ISC has ended development on the ISC DHCP client as of early 2022. >> This client implementation is no longer maintained and should not be >> used in production any longer. > >

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

e.com/questions/469716/systemd-networkd-run-script-after-dhcp-client-aqcuires-new-address You mean: "I couldn't get networkd-dispatcher to respond to dhcp changes on Ubuntu Server 20.04, but[...] " :) ? Yes. I know that this is two year old, but I did not found anything newer with answe

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

On 8/5/22 2:27 pm, Rick Thomas wrote: Thanks! Rick PS: I'll also do the IPv6 part, because I'm interested in that too. One word of caution moving away from ISC dhcp client is that any possibility of it being started by the networking daemon will result in very bad behaviour i

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

On 8/5/22 3:19 pm, Kamil Jońca wrote: I cannot see if systemd-networkd can run scripts[1] after change in lease. Am I missing something? The top answer below is a partial answer to your question. https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/469716/systemd-networkd-run-script-after-dhcp-client

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

Jeremy Ardley writes: [...] > > You can just use systemd-networkd as an IPv4 dhcp client. I cannot see if systemd-networkd can run scripts[1] after change in lease. Am I missing something? KJ [1] similar to /etc/dhcp/dhclient*hooks.d -- http://wolnelektury.pl/wesprzyj/teraz/

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

On 5/8/2022 5:24 AM, Rick Thomas wrote: On Sat, May 7, 2022, at 8:14 PM, Jeremy Ardley wrote: On 8/5/22 10:47 am, Rick Thomas wrote: ISC has ended development on the ISC DHCP client as of early 2022. This client implementation is no longer maintained and should not be used in production any

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

On Sat, May 7, 2022, at 9:37 PM, Jeremy Ardley wrote: > On 8/5/22 11:27 am, Rick Thomas wrote: >> Thanks for the heads up! >> Can you describe in detail what one needs to do in order to switch over? >> I.e. what to remove, what to install? What to configure? > > This is a recent blogpost of min

Re: Alternatives to ISC dhcp-client ?

On 8/5/22 11:27 am, Rick Thomas wrote: Thanks for the heads up! Can you describe in detail what one needs to do in order to switch over? I.e. what to remove, what to install? What to configure? This is a recent blogpost of mine showing a more complex installation including IPv6 delegati

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >