From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 5 09:55:32 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7960316A4CE for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 09:55:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from sun13.bham.ac.uk (sun13.bham.ac.uk [147.188.128.145]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7E4243D1F for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 09:55:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from trigonometric@softhome.net) Received: from [147.188.128.127] (helo=bham.ac.uk) by sun13.bham.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 1Aonip-0002Ps-00 for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 17:55:27 +0000 Received: from sci-fs1.bham.ac.uk ([147.188.118.71]) by bham.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Aonip-0004nY-CS for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 17:55:27 +0000 Received: from SPECULUSHX1THE not authenticated [147.188.140.98] Novell NetWare; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 17:55:27 +0000 Message-ID: <00d901c3ec11$5a600ff0$0601a8c0@SPECULUSHX1THE> From: "Jimmy Firewire" To: Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 17:56:17 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Subject: RSA/DSA Host key generation didn't happen X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 17:55:32 -0000 Did anyone else find that on 5.2-RELEASE, that the RSA and DSA host keys were not generated on first boot, as happens on other distros? Could this possibly be related to the DHCP/resolve.conf issue mentioned a while back: http://makeashorterlink.com/?A5D921F47 I also experienced some strange DHCP problem. I had configured the machine not to use DHCP on boot for certain reasons not worth mentioning here. I was going to send a message to a BSD forum asking about this but I didn't, here is a copy of that message: >I am no networking expert, and I suspect this is the source of my >problems. >I recently installed 5.2R on a machine of mine, and upon attempting to >setup the network device: > dhclient rl0 > > It got assigned an IP from my router correctly; there is a lease in > /var/db/dhclient.leases, but I am unable to access the internet. I can ping > local hosts, but if I try: > > ping www.google.com > > I get > > ping: cannot resolve www.google.com: Host name lookup failure > > and this doesn't work with external IPs either > > but if I do: > > dnsquery -n 192.168.1.1 www.google.com > > it returns the correct stuff. > > If I do: > > netstat -r > > the following gets returned: > OK, sorry about this, the following is a HTML table as the forum had HTML support so you might have to render this under a HTML engine if you are sufficiently interested in seeing the output:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefsUseNetifExpire
default 192.168.1.1 UGS 0 0 rl0
localhost localhost UH 1 112 lo0
192.168.1 link#1 UC 0 0 rl0
192.168.1.1 XX:XX:XX:XX:XX:XX UHLW 1 4 rl0 1056
192.168.1.2 localhost UGHS 0 0 lo0
> On my 5.1 system, there is a little c by the flags for the router: > > UGSc > > which corresponds to > > RFT_PRCLONING Protocol-specified gnerate new routes on use > > so I tried to somehow force this c flag: > > route -v change default -cloning > U: inet 0.0.0.0; inet 0.0.0.0; RTM_CHANGE: Change Metrics or flags: len 112, > pid: 0, seq 1, errno 0, flags: > locks: inits: > sockaddrs: > default default > change net default > > but it doesn't seem to put the little c in the flags list, or change the > status of the problem. > > I'm probably overlooking something simple, but my clue is limited to that > expressed in this message. So if someone with clue could help me I would be > thankful. > > Note, that i have no problems setting up network interfaces with the same > router on another box running 5.1R, it only seems to be this new box with > 5.2R that is having trouble. Is suspect it has something to do with 5.2R. OK so this is pretty wierd. I solved this later by putting problem was wierd but resolved by putting: nameserver x.x.x.x in /etc/resolv.conf I didn't know that just touching it would work like for the other people. So I don't know, but there seems to be a couple of wierd problems with the new 5.2R. Any thoughts? iooi