Re: dhcpcd vs dhclient

[buhrow%lothlorien.nfbcal.org@localhost (Brian Buhrow)]

        Hello.  We have a number of Cisco switches with spanning tree
protection turned on.  this causes the link to come up on the physical port
about 15-20 seconds before packets are permitted to flow through the
interface.  If you're running into this, you might ry putting the following
in your/etc/ifconfig.wm0 or ifconfig.nfe0, or what ever your interface is
called.

up
!sleep  30

Then, dhclient or dhcpdc should be able to get an address right away.

-Brian

On Jul 30, 12:06am, Chris Ross wrote:
} Subject: Re: dhcpcd vs dhclient
} 
} On Jul 29, 2010, at 9:28 PM, matthew sporleder wrote:
} > On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Chris Ross 
<cross+netbsd%distal.com@localhost> =
} wrote:
} >>  On my 5.99.36 i386 machine from mid-July, it seems highly =
} unreliable.  More often than not it fails to get an address, and seems =
} to not be running by the time the machine gets to multi-user, without =
} having logged anything.
} >=20
} > Add the following dhcpcd options;
} > -b -t 0
} 
}   I had tried adding -w, to avoid an error I was getting from ntp later =
} in the boot.  As there are other things in the boot process that need =
} network connectivity, it seems like -b would be the opposite of what I =
} want.
} 
}   I can see now that I'm getting the same failure of ntpdate.  If -b is =
} required to make dhcpcd work, but I need -w to make the rest of the boot =
} process work, there seems to be an impass.
} 
}   Why had you suggested -b -t 0?
} 
}         - Chris
} 
>-- End of excerpt from Chris Ross