On Fri, Jan 07, 2000 at 07:44:33PM -0600, M. Smith wrote:
> J. Scott Kasten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
>
> >I'm not convinced that this etiology is totally correct, (although is
> >on the right track.)
> >
> >Smith didn't indicate whether it was an NT server offering the DHCP.
> >For argument's sake, I'll assume it is. The NT server keeps a hash
> >with your mac and assigned address. Even if you request a new lease,
> >you should still get the same address unless you declined the old for
> >some reason. <rest snipped...>
>
> Frankly, I have no idea what operating system swbell.net uses for its
> DHCP server. As per my original question, whatever server they do use
> treats my Windows box differently than it treats my Linux box when it
> asks for an IP lease.
>
I must not have read his original post in full, as I don't recall cable
or DSL even being involved, but I've noticed the last umpteen replays
did pick up on that so I assume I'm in error.
>
> Since I strongly suspect their DHCP server software doesn't change
> just because I connect with DSL with one brand of client OS vs
> another, it seems quite logical that there is a difference in how
> Windows makes the DHCP request vs Linux which causes SW Bell's DHCP
> server to respond differently. To my layman's logic, the first answer
> I received seemed quite compelling.
>
> As noted in my original request, it really doesn't matter to me
> whether I can make Linux respond in this case like Win98 or not. I
> simply found it an interesting phenomenon and was curious as to why it
> might be this way.
I've seen all sorts of weird phenomena with DHCP over the past couple
years. The original spec did not nail some things down air tight, which
of course leads to interprtation by the implementor or the client/server
software how to act. I just mearly brought the unable to renew thing
up because I have observed that behavior before in the test lab.
>
> No intention to cause a fuss.
>
Not at all. That's we learn -- even if it ends up being by committee!
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
> as the Subject.
>
--
J. Scott Kasten
jsk AT tetracon-eng DOT net
"That wasn't an attack. It was preemptive retaliation!"
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
