Re: [CentOS] kickstart, no dhcp reply received.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



I would try commenting out the option for your tftp server in dhcp.conf. And see if the machine takes the lease. There is an ACK being sent back so the machine accepts the lease.

May 24 23:01:38 fong-31-100 in.tftpd [29880]: tftp: client does not
accept options

You notice that the machine requests the lease and then ACK before this, it is as if the machine is sending out the DHCP_DISCOVER and the server replies but the machine does not request the address.

If this the case then you might think about putting the install files on an nfs share and then recreating your kickstart file with the nfs server information.

On 5/24/06, Jim Perrin <jperrin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> dhcpd logs multiple discover requests follow by multiple offers.  The
> client just won't accept the offer:

It actually gets the IP, as there's a DHCPACK in the log.
If the client is refusing the address or the options for some reason,
then it's possible that it's a minor misconfiguration in the DHCP
server.
The dhcp server appears to be 192.168.1.1, according to the logs, is
it also the gateway (would be the routers stanza in the dhcpd.conf)?
Does the server declare itself as authoritative for the zone?
There are also occasionally things within the dhcpd.conf that need to
be set for pxe to work. Have you done these?



> May 24 16:01:36 fong-31-100 dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:07:e9:32:b8:46 via eth1
> May 24 16:01:37 fong-31-100 dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 192.168.1.254 to
> 00:07:e9:32:b8:46 via eth1
> May 24 16:01:38 fong-31-100 dhcpd: DHCPREQUEST for 192.168.1.254
> (192.168.1.1) from 00:07:e9:32:b8:46 via eth1
> May 24 16:01:38 fong-31-100 dhcpd: DHCPACK on 192.168.1.254 to
> 00:07:e9:32:b8:46 via eth1
> May 24 23:01:38 fong-31-100 in.tftpd[29880]: tftp: client does not
> accept options



> The kickstart server (dhcp, tftp, etc.) and the machine being kicked
> (dhcp client) are directly connected via a crossover cable.
>
>
> On 5/24/06, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Fong Vang wrote:
> > >
> > > Any idea what else to check for?  Could it be that the e1000 driver in
> > > CentOS 4.3 x64 is older than the CentOS 4.1 driver?
> >
> > dont know about the rest of your issues, but the e1000 driver has
> > definitely been updated since 4.1 days...
> >
> > - KB
> >
> > --
> > Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219@icq
> > _______________________________________________
> > CentOS mailing list
> > CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> >
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


--
This message has been double ROT13 encoded for security. Anyone other
than the intended recipient attempting to decode this message will be
in violation of the DMCA
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos



--
Thx
Joshua Gimer
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]
  Powered by Linux