Bug#395411: debian-installer: [daily 20061026] fails to set up route + fails to see mirrors
Geert Stappers
>
> Problem 1: DHCP gets the machine an IP address, but I get the
> message:
>
> "The network autoconfiguration was successful. However, no
> default route was set ... Continue without a default route?"
That means: something wrong with _your_ DHCP server.
> This is strange, because if I continue installation selecting
> 'Yes', keeps hitting Enter (giving no name server, no domain
> name, etc.), no network mirror, install from CD only,
> install GRUB, and reboot the newly installed system, the route
> is set fine:
>
> "debian:~# route
> ...
> 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 ...
> default 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 ..."
>
> by the default configuration:
>
> "debian:~# cat /etc/network/interfaces
> ...
> allow-hotplug eth0
> iface eth0 inet dhcp"
I think you are saying
"I don't know that my network has two DHCP servers"
There is nothing wrong that, just configure them _both_ correctly.
> Problem 2: If I instead choose 'No', and configure the
> network manually, choose any network mirror, the installer
> tells me:
>
> "The installer failed to access the mirror. ..."
That is also due the misconfigured DHCP server.
Leaving further BR maintiance up to you.
Cheers
Geert Stappers
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Jens Peter Secher
Geert Stappers wrote:
> Op 26-10-2006 om 22:27 schreef Jens Peter Secher:
> >
> > Problem 1: DHCP gets the machine an IP address, but I get the
> > message:
> >
> > "The network autoconfiguration was successful. However, no
> > default route was set ... Continue without a default route?"
>
> That means: something wrong with _your_ DHCP server.
Well, there isn't as far as I can see. My network looks as follows.
,------.
| ADSL |
`------'
| |
,------------------.
| eth1 |
| |
| Debian Etch |
| running udhcpd |
| and iptables |
| |
| eth0 192.168.1.1 |
`------------------'
| |
X (crossover)
| |
,------------------.
| eth0 |
| |
| ThinkPad T42 |
`------------------'
The contents of /etc/udhcpd.conf is
start 192.168.1.4
end 192.168.1.254
interface eth0
max_leases 50
option dns 192.168.1.1
option router 192.168.1.1
option namesvr 192.168.1.1
option wins 192.168.1.1
option domain xxxx.dk
After the installer says "...However, no default route was set...", the
output on VT4 is
kernel: e1000: eth0: e1000_watchdog_task: NIC Link is Up 100 Mbps Full Duplex
dhclient: Listening on LPF/eth0/xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
dhclient: Sending on LPF/eth0/xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
dhclient: Sending on Socket/fallback/fallback-net
dhclient: DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 3
dhclient: DHCPOFFER from 192.168.1.1
dhclient: DHCPREQUEST on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67
dhclient: DHCPACK from 192.168.1.1
dhclient: bound to 192.168.1.8 -- renewal in 432000 seconds.
And, as I wrote earlier:
> > This is strange, because if I continue installation selecting
> > 'Yes', keeps hitting Enter (giving no name server, no domain
> > name, etc.), no network mirror, install from CD only,
> > install GRUB, and reboot the newly installed system, the route
> > is set fine:
> >
> > "debian:~# route
> > ...
> > 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 ...
> > default 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 ..."
> >
> > by the default configuration:
> >
> > "debian:~# cat /etc/network/interfaces
> > ...
> > allow-hotplug eth0
> > iface eth0 inet dhcp"
> I think you are saying
> "I don't know that my network has two DHCP servers"
I don't think so, see above. Do you have any suggestions to what I
should do to debug further?
> > Problem 2: If I instead choose 'No', and configure the
> > network manually, choose any network mirror, the installer
> > tells me:
> >
> > "The installer failed to access the mirror. ..."
>
> That is also due the misconfigured DHCP server.
Maybe I was not clear enough about this part.
If I manually configure the interface with route and everything, the
connection works fine, and I can wget the Release files etc. from the
console.
Cheers,
--
Jens Peter Secher
_DD6A 05B0 174E BFB2 D4D9 B52E 0EE5 978A FE63 E8A1 jpsecher gmail com_
A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion
Q. Why is top posting bad?
Geert Stappers
> Geert Stappers
> > > [ d-i DHCP request fails, installed system DHCP request works ]
> >
> > I think you are saying
> > "I don't know that my network has two DHCP servers"
>
> I don't think so, see above. Do you have any suggestions to what I
> should do to debug further?
Install the package dhcpdump on computer 192.168.1.1,
capture both sessions (d-i & installed)
and search for differences in the DHCP replies, especial on the router info
Geert Stappers
Who thinks that it BR _could_ be a d-i issue.
Geert Stappers
> > Op 26-10-2006 om 22:27 schreef Jens Peter Secher:
> > > network manually, choose any network mirror, the installer
> > > tells me:
> > >
> > > "The installer failed to access the mirror. ..."
> >
> > That is also due the misconfigured DHCP server.
>
> Maybe I was not clear enough about this part.
>
> If I manually configure the interface with route and everything, the
> connection works fine, and I can wget the Release files etc. from the
> console.
rephrasing in my words:
| configured network
| manual "wget" works
| "wget" of d-i fails
Please provide the command you used on the console.
Geert Stappers
Jens Peter Secher
Geert Stappers wrote:
>
> Op 04-11-2006 om 12:29 schreef Jens Peter Secher:
> >
> >
> > If I manually configure the interface with route and everything, the
> > connection works fine, and I can wget the Release files etc. from the
> > console.
>
> rephrasing in my words:
> | configured network
> | manual "wget" works
> | "wget" of d-i fails
>
> Please provide the command you used on the console.
wget -q http://mirrors.dotsrc.org/debian//dists/testing/main/binary-i386/Release -O - | grep Architecture
Maybe you should give the initial bug report a reread, and if I am
unclear in places I can try to elaborate; I can reproduce the problems,
so I can dig out all that you want.
Cheers,
--
Jens Peter Secher
_DD6A 05B0 174E BFB2 D4D9 B52E 0EE5 978A FE63 E8A1 jpsecher gmail com_
A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion
Q. Why is top posting bad?
--
Geert Stappers
> Geert Stappers wrote:
> >
> > Please provide the command you used on the console.
>
> wget -q http://mirrors.dotsrc.org/debian//dists/testing/main/binary-i386/Release -O - | grep Architecture
Why two slash between debian and dists?
> Maybe you should give the initial bug report a reread, and if I am
> unclear in places I can try to elaborate; I can reproduce the problems,
> so I can dig out all that you want.
Retry with mirror definition with a single slash between debian and dists
(enter 'debian', not 'debian/' (or such thing))
Cheers
Geert Stappers
Geert Stappers
> Op 04-11-2006 om 12:29 schreef Jens Peter Secher:
>
> Install the package dhcpdump on computer 192.168.1.1,
> capture both sessions (d-i & installed)
> and search for differences in the DHCP replies, especial on the router info
Still makes sense.
> Geert Stappers
> Who thinks that it BR _could_ be a d-i issue.
Who thinks that this BR _could_ be a d-i issue.
FYI:
d-i uses ISC DHCP 2.x, installed system ISC DHCP 3.x.
HtH
GSt
Jens Peter Secher
> Op 04-11-2006 om 20:00 schreef Jens Peter Secher:
> >
>
> Why two slash between debian and dists?
Because that is what is written as debug info on VT4 by the installer.
But that is not the problem. The above command works fine for me.
But apparently not for the installer. As mentioned in the original
bug report, I think that the installer forgets to add a " | cut -d' '
-f 2" at the end of that command such that the result is "i386" and
not "Architecture: i386".
--
Jens Peter Secher
_DD6A 05B0 174E BFB2 D4D9 B52E 0EE5 978A FE63 E8A1 jpsecher gmail com_
A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion
Q. Why is top posting bad?
Jens Peter Secher
> Op 04-11-2006 om 12:29 schreef Jens Peter Secher:
> > Geert Stappers
>
> > > > [ d-i DHCP request fails, installed system DHCP request works ]
> > >
> > > I think you are saying
> > > "I don't know that my network has two DHCP servers"
> >
> > I don't think so, see above. Do you have any suggestions to what I
> > should do to debug further?
>
> Install the package dhcpdump on computer 192.168.1.1,
> capture both sessions (d-i & installed)
> and search for differences in the DHCP replies, especial on the router info
I ran
nohup sudo sh -c "bin/dchptrace &"
on 192.168.1.1 where bin/dhcptrace is
#!/bin/sh
tcpdump -lenx -s 1500 port bootps or port bootpc | dhcpdump > dhcp.trace
The output (MAC-obfuscated by me) after retrying debian_installer is
TIME: 19:07:53.484470
IP: > (my:t4:2m:ac:ad:dr) > (ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff)
OP: 1 (BOOTPREQUEST)
HTYPE: 1 (Ethernet)
HLEN: 6
HOPS: 0
XID: c2693933
SECS: 0
FLAGS: 0
CIADDR: 0.0.0.0
YIADDR: 0.0.0.0
SIADDR: 0.0.0.0
GIADDR: 0.0.0.0
CHADDR: my:t4:2m:ac:ad:dr:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00
SNAME: .
FNAME: .
OPTION: 53 ( 1) DHCP message type 1 (DHCPDISCOVER)
OPTION: 60 ( 3) Vendor class identifier d-i
OPTION: 55 ( 7) Parameter Request List 1 (Subnet mask)
28 (Broadcast address)
2 (Time offset)
3 (Routers)
15 (Domainname)
6 (DNS server)
12 (Host name)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TIME: 19:07:53.496186
IP: > (se:rv:er:ad:dr:es) > (my:t4:2m:ac:ad:dr)
OP: 2 (BOOTPREPLY)
HTYPE: 1 (Ethernet)
HLEN: 6
HOPS: 0
XID: c2693933
SECS: 0
FLAGS: 0
CIADDR: 0.0.0.0
YIADDR: 192.168.1.8
SIADDR: 0.0.0.0
GIADDR: 0.0.0.0
CHADDR: my:t4:2m:ac:ad:dr:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00
SNAME: .
FNAME: .
OPTION: 53 ( 1) DHCP message type 2 (DHCPOFFER)
OPTION: 54 ( 4) Server identifier 192.168.1.1
OPTION: 51 ( 4) IP address leasetime 864000 (1w3d)
OPTION: 3 ( 4) Routers 192.168.1.1
OPTION: 5 ( 4) Name server 192.168.1.1
OPTION: 6 ( 4) DNS server 192.168.1.1
OPTION: 15 ( 14) Domainname ravneholm26.dk
OPTION: 44 ( 4) NetBIOS name server 192.168.1.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TIME: 19:07:55.498297
IP: > (my:t4:2m:ac:ad:dr) > (ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff)
OP: 1 (BOOTPREQUEST)
HTYPE: 1 (Ethernet)
HLEN: 6
HOPS: 0
XID: c2693933
SECS: 0
FLAGS: 0
CIADDR: 0.0.0.0
YIADDR: 0.0.0.0
SIADDR: 0.0.0.0
GIADDR: 0.0.0.0
CHADDR: my:t4:2m:ac:ad:dr:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00
SNAME: .
FNAME: .
OPTION: 53 ( 1) DHCP message type 3 (DHCPREQUEST)
OPTION: 54 ( 4) Server identifier 192.168.1.1
OPTION: 50 ( 4) Request IP address 192.168.1.8
OPTION: 60 ( 3) Vendor class identifier d-i
OPTION: 55 ( 7) Parameter Request List 1 (Subnet mask)
28 (Broadcast address)
2 (Time offset)
3 (Routers)
15 (Domainname)
6 (DNS server)
12 (Host name)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TIME: 19:07:55.508238
IP: > (se:rv:er:ad:dr:es) > (my:t4:2m:ac:ad:dr)
OP: 2 (BOOTPREPLY)
HTYPE: 1 (Ethernet)
HLEN: 6
HOPS: 0
XID: c2693933
SECS: 0
FLAGS: 0
CIADDR: 0.0.0.0
YIADDR: 192.168.1.8
SIADDR: 0.0.0.0
GIADDR: 0.0.0.0
CHADDR: my:t4:2m:ac:ad:dr:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00
SNAME: .
FNAME: .
OPTION: 53 ( 1) DHCP message type 5 (DHCPACK)
OPTION: 54 ( 4) Server identifier 192.168.1.1
OPTION: 51 ( 4) IP address leasetime 864000 (1w3d)
OPTION: 3 ( 4) Routers 192.168.1.1
OPTION: 5 ( 4) Name server 192.168.1.1
OPTION: 6 ( 4) DNS server 192.168.1.1
OPTION: 15 ( 14) Domainname ravneholm26.dk
OPTION: 44 ( 4) NetBIOS name server 192.168.1.1
When I compare this output to what happens on non-debian-installer DHCP
requests, I do not see any real differences.
--
Jens Peter Secher
_DD6A 05B0 174E BFB2 D4D9 B52E 0EE5 978A FE63 E8A1 jpsecher gmail com_
A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion
Q. Why is top posting bad?
Joey Hess
> But that is not the problem. The above command works fine for me.
> But apparently not for the installer. As mentioned in the original
> bug report, I think that the installer forgets to add a " | cut -d' '
> -f 2" at the end of that command such that the result is "i386" and
> not "Architecture: i386".
From the source code:
asprintf(&command, "wget -q %s://%s%s/dists/%s/Release -O - | grep ^Suite: | cut -d' ' -f 2",
protocol, hostname, directory, suite);
di_log(DI_LOG_LEVEL_DEBUG, "command: %s", command);
f = popen(command, "r");
--
see shy jo
Geert Stappers
> On 11/4/06, Geert Stappers <stap...@stappers.nl> wrote:
> >>
> >> Do you have any suggestions to what I should do to debug further?
> >
> >Install the package dhcpdump on computer 192.168.1.1,
> >capture both sessions (d-i & installed)
> >and search for differences in the DHCP replies, especial on the router info
>
> I ran
>
> nohup sudo sh -c "bin/dchptrace &"
>
> on 192.168.1.1 where bin/dhcptrace is
>
> #!/bin/sh
> tcpdump -lenx -s 1500 port bootps or port bootpc | dhcpdump > dhcp.trace
>
> The output (MAC-obfuscated by me) after retrying debian_installer is
>
> TIME: 19:07:53.484470
> IP: > (my:t4:2m:ac:ad:dr) > (ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff)
> OP: 1 (BOOTPREQUEST)
> OPTION: 55 ( 7) Parameter Request List 1 (Subnet mask)
> 28 (Broadcast address)
> 6 (DNS server)
> 12 (Host name)
> OPTION: 5 ( 4) Name server 192.168.1.1
> OPTION: 6 ( 4) DNS server 192.168.1.1
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> TIME: 19:07:55.498297
<snip/>
> OPTION: 60 ( 3) Vendor class identifier d-i
> OPTION: 55 ( 7) Parameter Request List 1 (Subnet mask)
> 28 (Broadcast address)
> 15 (Domainname)
> 6 (DNS server)
> 12 (Host name)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> TIME: 19:07:55.508238
> IP: > (se:rv:er:ad:dr:es) > (my:t4:2m:ac:ad:dr)
> OP: 2 (BOOTPREPLY)
> OPTION: 54 ( 4) Server identifier 192.168.1.1
> OPTION: 51 ( 4) IP address leasetime 864000 (1w3d)
> OPTION: 3 ( 4) Routers 192.168.1.1
> OPTION: 5 ( 4) Name server 192.168.1.1
> OPTION: 6 ( 4) DNS server 192.168.1.1
>
> requests, I do not see any real differences.
It are indeed good (looking) DHCP packets.
Did the installer whine about "no router" during the logged session?
Cheers
Geert Stappers
Jens Peter Secher
>
> It are indeed good (looking) DHCP packets.
>
> Did the installer whine about "no router" during the logged session?
Yes.
--
Jens Peter Secher
_DD6A 05B0 174E BFB2 D4D9 B52E 0EE5 978A FE63 E8A1 jpsecher gmail com_
A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion
Q. Why is top posting bad?
Jens Peter Secher
installer (i386 CD1).