Re: problems with dhclient after upgrade to sarge
Hi David!
first of all i forgot on which list that was. maybe you can rereply on
the list so others can also gain from our knowledge.
maybe (if u are in control of the dhcp-server) the default-gateway is
not set?
you can influence the routing table yourself. mine looks like that
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.102.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
0.0.0.0 192.168.102.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
you will definitely need the lower line which you can get with a command
like:
route set default gw [so.me.ip.ad.re.ss]
if you only have one interface. look up in "man route" if you need more
special setup.
but that route not found/network unreachable is _always_ a sign that the
routing doesn't work.
rather try pinging 66.102.9.104 than www.google.com in order to find
out if everything works.
good luck,
klaus
* David Ballantyne <ballanty@cita.utoronto.ca> [2004-04-23 22:24:
> From: David Ballantyne <ballanty@cita.utoronto.ca>
> Subject: Re: problems with dhclient after upgrade to sarge
> To: debian-testing@lists.debian.org, debian-subscriber@worstofall.com
>
> Hi Klaus,
>
> Sorry for not responding sooner, but I'm not subscribed to the list, so it
> took me a while to find your messeage.
>
> In response to your questions:
>
> > what does 'route -an' give you?
>
> I first ran /sbin/dhclient, and I get all the normal looking stuff. Then
> running 'route -n' gives:
>
> ansum:~# route -n
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
> Iface
> ansum:~#
>
> So, there's nothing there.
>
> > what does 'cat /etc/resolv.conf' give you?
>
> ansum:~# cat /etc/resolv.conf
> search cp.telus.net
> nameserver 66.203.195.237
>
> Looks normal...
>
> > you are getting an ip, obviously, so maybe try pinging your dhcp server?
>
> ansum:~# ping 66.203.194.1
> PING 66.203.194.1 (66.203.194.1): 56 data bytes
> ping: send to: Network is unreachable
> ping: wrote 66.203.194.1 64 chars, ret=-1
> ping: send to: Network is unreachable
> .
> .
> .
> So, even though dhcp seems to be working, the rest of the computer is
> etting the message. Does this narrow the problem down at all?
>
> Thanks,
>
Reply to: