Vista doesn't ack dhcp offer

[Matt Cowger]

I'd like to see a sniff from a client with the registry hack applied as
well - I suspect there is something different about its request....

I don't know what DHCPd is doing different, but I'd like to see a sniff
of the successful OFFER/DISCOVER/ACK

-----Original Message-----
From: dhcp-users-bounce at isc.org [mailto:dhcp-users-bounce at isc.org] On
Behalf Of Doug Tucker
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 12:11 PM
To: dhcp-users at isc.org
Subject: RE: Vista doesn't ack dhcp offer

Well, in theory, wasn't that done when I was trying it wirelessly?  And
keep in mind, if I apply the MS registry hack, then it gets an address
no problem.  So are you suggesting that our switches, as well as our
wireless access points, due to this broadcast flag setting, are refusing
to pass the traffic being sent from the dhcp server back the the client?
What would the dhcp server itself be doing to create this issue based on
the type of client request it received in the first place?


On Thu, 2007-09-20 at 11:59 -0700, Matt Cowger wrote:
> Doug, et al,
> 
> In the client side sniff, I see some discovers, but I don't see any
> indication of the OFFER making it back to the client's
> interface.....this would be why you don't get a successful lease on
the
> client side.  Sounds like your network between the DHCP server and
your
> client is somehow getting pissed and refusing to forward the traffic
> along.
> 
> Have you tried putting your client on the same broadcast domain to
> isolate your switching gear as the problem?
> 
> --m
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dhcp-users-bounce at isc.org [mailto:dhcp-users-bounce at isc.org] On
> Behalf Of Doug Tucker
> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:46 AM
> To: dhcp-users at isc.org
> Subject: RE: Vista doesn't ack dhcp offer
> 
> Gents!  No, no, I didn't just go away :).  Here is the requested
clients
> sniff, sorry it took so long to get it.  Long story, and I did have to
> wire connect directly to the vlan in question to even perform a sniff,
> but it's done.  Please see it here:
> 
> 
> http://engr.smu.edu/~tuckerd/client_dump.txt
> 
> Thanks to everyone!!
> 
> On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 13:48 -0700, Matt Cowger wrote:
> > Do you have an equivalent sniff for the client side?  It might be
> > useful.
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dhcp-users-bounce at isc.org [mailto:dhcp-users-bounce at isc.org]
On
> > Behalf Of Doug Tucker
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 1:41 PM
> > To: dhcp-users at isc.org
> > Subject: Re: Vista doesn't ack dhcp offer
> > 
> > Well, yes, we are running iptables on the box as well...we use the
> nocat
> > package for redirecting the wireless clients to an auth system.  I
> don't
> > see anything unusual happen during these requests in the tables
output
> > though fwiw, but, it's possible I guess to be the problem...but even
> > then, wouldn't we see the attempt in the dump?  It literally looks
> like
> > after the offer, it's dropped on the client side.  Doesn't look like
> the
> > client ever comes back?
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 12:55 -0700, David W. Hankins wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 01:40:50PM -0500, Doug Tucker wrote:
> > > > http://engr.smu.edu/~tuckerd/dump.txt
> > > 
> > > These offers look correct to me, and what any client that sets the
> > > broadcast bit should need and expect.
> > > 
> > > Are you using any kind of l2 security technology, to limit address
> > > spoofing and so forth?  These sometimes trigger false positives
and
> > > drop the server or client packets.
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Ash bugud-gul durbatuluk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
> > > Why settle for the lesser evil?
> > https://secure.isc.org/store/t-shirt/
> > 
> > 
> 
>