Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 10:59:33 -0400 From: Jerry <jerry@seibercom.net> To: FreeBSD <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Access to Time Warner cable network Message-ID: <20120401105933.4c6a9d77@scorpio> In-Reply-To: <4F786796.5010903@FreeBSD.org> References: <4F7798D0.7000404@a1poweruser.com> <4F77A360.9080601@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <4F77A6CA.50406@a1poweruser.com> <20120401143541.4d7d186f@gumby.homeunix.com> <4F786796.5010903@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 15:35:02 +0100 Matthew Seaman articulated: > On 01/04/2012 14:35, RW wrote: > > I had a modem that did something similar, it issued a temporary > > private ip address and the replaced it with a routable address. > > It's fairly sad that they don't use the officially mandated[*] > 169.254.0.0/16 netblock which is what DHCP clients/servers are > supposed to use when they need to temporarily grab an address. > > > The difference here is that the DHCP server is in a different > > address block to the DHCP server, but I'm not sure that's a > > problem. I think that FreeBSD associates DHCP traffic with the > > interface its operating on irrespective of normal routing. > > Huh? One of those servers should be a client perhaps? > > Yes. Contacting a DHCP server is done using Ethernet protocols (at > least initially.[+]) Not using IP. That means DHCP client and server > have to be on the same ethernet segment, or there should be a > DHCP-relay on any routers between the client and server. If that > fails, then the client can assign itself a link-local address and try > that, but it is pretty uncommon in the wild. > > While you can run multiple different IP networks over the same > physical ethernet segment, and so have DHCP servers that dish out > addresses on networks distinct from any they have configured on their > own interfaces, you're more likely to run into this sort of scenario > if there are some DHCP relays in the picture. > > Cheers, > > Matthew > > [*] RFC 5735 > > [+] Well, also except for IPv6 -- DHCP6 just uses the auto link-local > addresses which are pretty much always configured on any IPv6 capable > interface. Mathew, I don't know if it is as cut and dry as that. The OP claimed that his Microsoft PC connected properly but not his FreeBSD machine. That, in itself, is certainly not surprising. I have always had better luck setting up networks with Microsoft; however, why is it that he is apparently the only FreeBSD user who is exhibiting these problems? I suppose it is conceivable that he alone uses the northern Ohio Time Warner cable system. I find that rather hard, although not impossible to believe. Further more, is this one branch of the TW empire the only one using this configuration? I kind of doubt that myself. It would seem to me that the problem lies in the OP's configuration itself. He claimed it worked with "AT&T". Is it possible he has some left over remnants of that configuration that are causing this problem. Windows would not suffer that problem since it creates a new configuration for each new host. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120401105933.4c6a9d77>