Subject: bootp... second shot.
To: None <port-alpha@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Michael T. Stolarchuk <>
List: port-alpha
Date: 05/04/1998 12:04:48
ok.  i've got a de500 in the machine, i'm running tftp,
i'm using a dhcp server... i've snooped the query from
the client, and the answer from the server, but the client
doesn't seem to every attempt to tftp netboot.

I'm using a /et/dhcpd.conf which looks like:

host rover2 {
                hardware ethernet 00:00:f8:00:85:44;
                option subnet-mask;
                option host-name "";
                filename "boot.netbsd.alpha";
                option root-path "/usr/local/dhcp/kernels/";
                option broadcast-address;
                option domain-name-servers;
                option domain-name "";

and the answer from the server looks like:

UDP:  ----- UDP Header -----
UDP:  Source port = 67
UDP:  Destination port = 68 (BOOTPC)
UDP:  Length = 308 
UDP:  Checksum = 8ADB 
DHCP: ----- Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol -----
DHCP: Hardware address type (htype) =  1 (Ethernet (10Mb))
DHCP: Hardware address length (hlen) = 6 octets
DHCP: Relay agent hops = 0
DHCP: Transaction ID = 0xb12dfd9a
DHCP: Time since boot = 0 seconds
DHCP: Flags = 0x0000
DHCP: Client address (ciaddr) =
DHCP: Your client address (yiaddr) =
DHCP: Next server address (siaddr) =
DHCP: Relay agent address (giaddr) =
DHCP: Client hardware address (chaddr) = 00:00:F8:00:85:44
DHCP: ----- (Options) field options -----
DHCP: Subnet mask =
DHCP: DNS server at =
DHCP: Hostname =
DHCP: DNS Domain =
DHCP: Network broadcast address =
DHCP: Boot File Name = boot.netbsd.alpha

Yep, the client repeatedly sends the requests.  I've tried
change ewa0_mode from twisted to full, without any additional

snoops for tftp only show results when i test the tftp
from some other machine.  The tftp succeeds for boot.netbsd.alpha.

I only see the request/response from the client.  It is as if
the alpha doesn't see the reply, or some parameter is missing
on the reply.  I've reviewed the dhcp rfcs to validate that 
the zero fields above make sense.

Any idea what to try next?