> There's nothing obviously wrong with your configuration. I
am
> assuming that you have the broadcast address route set up as
> documented in the README - without that, you won't win. Also, in a
> subsequent message, you mention that your system is freezing on
> startup. If this is the case, it's probably some kind of problem with
> your Win95 install, and you should fix that before you try to fix
> this. DHCP service problems shouldn't cause system freezes.
>
> _MelloN_
> documented in the README - without that, you won't win. Also, in a
> subsequent message, you mention that your system is freezing on
> startup. If this is the case, it's probably some kind of problem with
> your Win95 install, and you should fix that before you try to fix
> this. DHCP service problems shouldn't cause system freezes.
>
> _MelloN_
Thanks. The freezing was just that one machine.
> Are you working in a switched environment? We had the same
problem. Seems
> that some ethernet switches don't properly relay the DHCP info when the port
> comes up. If you are using switches, try turning spanning tree off. This
> can sometimes fix the problem. I have also heard that winsock 2.0 patch
> addresses some DHCP-related problems with Windows 95. It also supports the
> release of the lease on shutdown - something stock Win95 machines just don't
> do (at least in my experience).
> that some ethernet switches don't properly relay the DHCP info when the port
> comes up. If you are using switches, try turning spanning tree off. This
> can sometimes fix the problem. I have also heard that winsock 2.0 patch
> addresses some DHCP-related problems with Windows 95. It also supports the
> release of the lease on shutdown - something stock Win95 machines just don't
> do (at least in my experience).
>
> Erik Monson
I am in a switched environment (Cisco 5500's). After using the server
log and a sniffer I found the the clients were timing out before getting a
response from the server. After talking with Cisco, they say the portfast
option wasn't working "fast" enough, and that I should try the new
supervisor code. I would disable spantree except cisco says that ipx won't
work properly w/o the portfast option:( Hopefully, I'll be in a true IP
environment once I upgrade to Novell 5:) Before the original post, I
researched a bug with Novell'l 3.0.x client. Upgraded to 3.1.x with
Winsock 2.0 upgrade but that hadn't solved the problem. Thanks for the
lead on the switches!
> I get the same message. Looking at the syslog, the only
out-of-sorts
> message is "already acking address for 192.168.42.11" -- the Windows
> message seems to happen at the exact moment that shows up in the log.
>
> If you come up with a fix, can you keep me in mind? :-)
> message is "already acking address for 192.168.42.11" -- the Windows
> message seems to happen at the exact moment that shows up in the log.
>
> If you come up with a fix, can you keep me in mind? :-)
>
> Jim
I'll let you know if this helps... are you in a switched environment
too?
Jared Johnson, IT Engineer
TECSTAR Inc.
