Hi jkugler,
Quote Originally Posted by jkugler View Post
After having installed a system with AutoYast, eth0 is configured for DHCP. dhcp-client is installed. However, when it tries to acquire an address, this shows up in the logs, and eth0 ends up with no address. Any ideas?

This is SLES11 SP2 on Intel Hardware. lspci below.

Dec 13 09:36:38 linux ifup-dhcp: eth0 Starting DHCP4 client
Dec 13 09:36:38 linux dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: dhcpcd 3.2.3 starting
Dec 13 09:36:38 linux dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: hardware address = 00:1e:67:47:49:5e
Dec 13 09:36:38 linux dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: broadcasting for a lease
Dec 13 09:36:47 linux dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: offered 10.1.4.2 from 10.1.0.10
Dec 13 09:36:47 linux dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: checking 10.1.4.2 is available on attached networks
Dec 13 09:36:48 linux dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: leased 10.1.4.2 for 21600 seconds
Dec 13 09:36:48 linux dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: adding IP address 10.1.4.2/16
Dec 13 09:36:48 linux dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: adding route to 0.255.255.0/32 metric 0
Dec 13 09:36:48 linux dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: adding route to 1.0.0.0/10 via 0.255.255.0 metric 0
Dec 13 09:36:48 linux dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: adding default route via 10.1.255.1 metric 0
Dec 13 09:36:48 linux dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: setting hostname to `shadow-2'
Dec 13 09:36:49 shadow-2 dhcpcd[7652]: eth0: exiting
Dec 13 09:36:49 shadow-2 ifup-dhcp: eth0 IP address: 10.1.4.2/16
Dec 13 09:38:07 shadow-2 dhcpcd[8536]: eth0: received SIGTERM, stopping
Dec 13 09:38:07 shadow-2 dhcpcd[8536]: eth0: removing route to 1.0.0.0/10 via 0.255.255.0 metric 0
Dec 13 09:38:07 shadow-2 dhcpcd[8536]: eth0: netlink: No such process
Dec 13 09:38:07 shadow-2 dhcpcd[8536]: eth0: removing default route via 10.1.255.1 metric 0
Dec 13 09:38:07 shadow-2 dhcpcd[8536]: eth0: netlink: No such process
Dec 13 09:38:07 shadow-2 dhcpcd[8536]: eth0: removing IP address 10.1.4.2/16
Dec 13 09:38:07 shadow-2 dhcpcd[8536]: eth0: netlink: Cannot assign requested address
Dec 13 09:38:07 shadow-2 dhcpcd[8536]: eth0: exiting
well, as ab already pointed out, this does look pretty strange to me:

- "eth0: adding IP address 10.1.4.2/16" is good - you have your IP address
- "eth0: adding route to 0.255.255.0/32 metric 0" Why would you have an IP address of "0.255.255.0" on some router?
- "eth0: adding route to 1.0.0.0/10 via 0.255.255.0 metric 0" ... and why/how could you route packets to it?
- "eth0: adding default route via 10.1.255.1 metric 0" would be expected and fits the interface configuration

If that "0.255.255.0" business is really intended, I'd like to learn what it's about But most probably this is the part where things fail and the adater is taken down again. As I read RFC 1122, section 3.2.1.3, list item (b), sending a packet to that address is in violation of the RFC, so using this address as the target address is invalid.

Could you please run "dhcpcd-test eth0" on that machine and report back the results?

Regards,
Jens