From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roland Dreier Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 14794] New: IP address assigned by DHCP is dropped after ~40 seconds Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:16:13 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20091216154713.f082e7cf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4B2A9A40.90203@freemail.hu> <20091217132451.b168a796.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4B2AA64C.50709@gmail.com> <4B2B35B7.6060703@freemail.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jarek Poplawski , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Mike Galbraith , Ingo Molnar , netdev@vger.kernel.org, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org, bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org To: =?utf-8?Q?N=C3=A9meth_M=C3=A1rton?= Return-path: Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com ([171.68.10.86]:6056 "EHLO sj-iport-4.cisco.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750920AbZLRIQP (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Dec 2009 03:16:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B2B35B7.6060703@freemail.hu> (=?utf-8?Q?=22N=C3=A9meth_M?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A1rton=22's?= message of "Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:56:39 +0100") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > Unfortunately reverting the commit 61cbe54d9479ad98283b2dda686deae4c34b2d59 on > top of 2.6.32 does not solve the problem. Is there any possibility that one of the steps of the bisection was wrong? Could you possibly have accidentally marked a "bad" kernel as "good"? Addresses like 169.254.123.251 are RFC 3297 zeroconf link-local addresses. I think network manager will assign one of those if it thinks the DHCP negotiation failed. It might be informative to compare the network manager and dhclient log output (maybe in /var/log/daemon.log?) in the good and bad cases. - R.