Re: 2.1.75 breaks dhcpcd
Russell Coker - mailing lists account (bofh@snoopy.virtual.net.au)
Sat, 27 Dec 97 10:44:36 +1000
>> > But if he can get some type of positive feedback that that client has
>> > AT LEAST configured his interface appropriately for a bootp request,
>> > (ping it from another machine on the same segment, then observe the MAC
>> > address that comes back) he will know that :
>> > A: - at least the NIC in the client is functional.
>> > B: - the IP stack in the client is also functional enough to talk ICMP
>> > C: - the wiring from the client to his local segment is not the problem.
>>
>> D. That the machine he is booting is faulty.
>>
>> Responding to 0.0.0.0 can start all sorts of storms with old boxes, its
>> an extremely bad idea. I don't want Linux to be the box that brought down
>> some big network in a packet storm.
>Maybe configuring interface to some well-known strange address (just
>register one computer, never use its IP and publish it as well-known
>strange address?) would provide same functionality for admins without
>0.0.0.0 strangeness. What do you think?
Why not just let the site administrator pick an address for this? There
are millions of private IP addresses that they could choose from...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
In return for "mailbag contention" errors from buggy Exchange
servers I'll set my mail server to refuse mail from your domain.
The same response applies when a message to a postmaster
account bounces.
"Russell Coker - mailing lists account" <bofh@snoopy.virtual.net.au>
-----------------------------------------------------------