Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    No WAN DHCP Discover Request

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved 2.0-RC Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED
    16 Posts 5 Posters 6.5k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • N
      NOYB
      last edited by

      @cmb:

      @NOYB:

      And it also works perfectly fine with CentOS 5.x.

      which has 0 relevance. Try FreeBSD 8.1.

      The relevance is that of an additional data point in addition to that of pfSense 1.2.3, demonstrating VPC is working well and stable with multiple OS flavors.  Do you also contend that the fact the same VPC config works fine with pfSense 1.2.3 also has 0 relevance?

      Have you or the team even attempted to reproduce the problem?  And if so was the problem successfully reproduced?  And if so was there any attempt to determine where the issue resides?  (Free BSD compatibility, pfSense compatibility, etc?)

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • C
        cmb
        last edited by

        @NOYB:

        Have you or the team even attempted to reproduce the problem?  And if so was the problem successfully reproduced?  And if so was there any attempt to determine where the issue resides?  (Free BSD compatibility, pfSense compatibility, etc?)

        no because I don't have or care to use VPC. I know others do though.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • N
          NOYB
          last edited by

          @cmb:

          @NOYB:

          Have you or the team even attempted to reproduce the problem?  And if so was the problem successfully reproduced?  And if so was there any attempt to determine where the issue resides?  (Free BSD compatibility, pfSense compatibility, etc?)

          no because I don't have or care to use VPC. I know others do though.

          So you really have no idea then whether the issue is with pfSense, VPC config, or FreeBSD, as previously alluded too?

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • V
            voona
            last edited by

            @NOYB:

            @cmb:

            @NOYB:

            Have you or the team even attempted to reproduce the problem?  And if so was the problem successfully reproduced?  And if so was there any attempt to determine where the issue resides?  (Free BSD compatibility, pfSense compatibility, etc?)

            no because I don't have or care to use VPC. I know others do though.

            So you really have no idea then whether the issue is with pfSense, VPC config, or FreeBSD, as previously alluded too?

            LOL!

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • C
              cmb
              last edited by

              @NOYB:

              So you really have no idea then whether the issue is with pfSense, VPC config, or FreeBSD, as previously alluded too?

              I know it's not a problem in our code base, if you set something for DHCP it works. Whether it's VPC or FreeBSD 8.1 on VPC I don't know, some experimentation and you should be able to find out.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • N
                NOYB
                last edited by

                @cmb:

                I know it's not a problem in our code base, if you set something for DHCP it works. Whether it's VPC or FreeBSD 8.1 on VPC I don't know, some experimentation and you should be able to find out.

                All the following using the same VPC:

                FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE #0: Mon Jul 19.02:55:53 UTC 2010
                root
                dhclient de1
                DHCPDDISCOVER on de1 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 …
                Wireshark captures Src 0.0.0.0 Dst 255.255.255.255 Protocol DHCP Info DHCP Discover ...

                Also works with:
                FreeBSD 7.2
                pfSense 1.2.3
                CentOS 5.4 (have not tried 5.5)

                Does not work with:
                pfSense 2.0 BETA5
                option 8 shell
                dhclient de1
                DHCPDDISCOVER on de1 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 …
                Wireshark Captures ICMPv6 Neighbor solicitaion etc. but no DHCP

                Seems to me dhclient works correclty with everthing except pfSnese 2.0 BETA.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • W
                  wallabybob
                  last edited by

                  A while ago I tried a pfSense 2.0 BETA snapshot under virtual box. Virtual box NICs default to some type of AMD NIC. One or both of the NICs wouldn't work (I forget the exact symptom but it was something along the lines of "wouldn't transmit" which bears a resemblance to what you have reported). The problem went away when I changed the emulated NIC type to Intel e1000. I suspected a driver problem but didn't consider it worthwhile to investigate.

                  How about interchanging your LAN and WAN interfaces? Does the system behave any differently?

                  The chipsets recognised by the de driver were used in lots of different types of NICs, a number of them having their own peculiarities. Its possible something in the de driver is broken for a particular NIC but the driver still works for most of the recognised chips.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • N
                    NOYB
                    last edited by

                    Interchanging the LAN and WAN does not change behavior.

                    As for drivers and chip sets, as mentioned this same config works with both FreeBSD 7.2 and FreeBSD 8.1.
                    pfSense 1.2.3 is on FreeBSD 7.2 and that works too.
                    pfSense 2 BETA5 is on FreeBSD 8.0 or 8.1 and that does not work.

                    So what is it about pfSense 2 BETA5 that is breaking this?

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • N
                      NOYB
                      last edited by

                      Okay, here is something kind of odd and interesting.

                      Going through the Setup Wizard (web), making no changes, and clicking the Reload button at the end, releases a bunch of buffered up DHCP Discover requests.  Also LAN access is gone after this.

                      But a reboot puts it right back to square one.

                      What is going on?

                      P.S. pfSense Version 1.2.3 works fine.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • _
                        _igor_
                        last edited by

                        Did you change your interface-settings as said by wallabybob?

                        Virtual box NICs default to some type of AMD NIC. One or both of the NICs wouldn't work (I forget the exact symptom but it was something along the lines of "wouldn't transmit" which bears a resemblance to what you have reported). The problem went away when I changed the emulated NIC type to Intel e1000.

                        That should be your next action!

                        Your way to search for that error seems to be ineffective.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • N
                          NOYB
                          last edited by

                          @_igor_:

                          Did you change your interface-settings as said by wallabybob?

                          Virtual box NICs default to some type of AMD NIC. One or both of the NICs wouldn't work (I forget the exact symptom but it was something along the lines of "wouldn't transmit" which bears a resemblance to what you have reported). The problem went away when I changed the emulated NIC type to Intel e1000.

                          That should be your next action!

                          Your way to search for that error seems to be ineffective.

                          Of course I did, had already tried and retried.

                          Your way of assisting seems to be ineffective.  Otherwise I'm sure the problem would be solved by now.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.