Unix Technical Forum

SEO

vBulletin Search Engine Optimization


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Unix Operating Systems > OpenBSD > comp.unix.bsd.openbsd.misc

Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-16-2008, 08:10 AM
dbpatterson
 
Posts: n/a
Default dhclient getting address that (it seems) belongs to another NIC, all packets dropped

I have an IBM X40 with an Intel NIC, shows up as:
em0 at pci1 dev 1 function 0 "Intel PRO/1000MT Mobile (82541GI)" rev
0x00: irq 11, address 00:0a:e4:2b:0e:63

I'm in a little NAT'd subnet, controlled by dhcp. So I dhclient em0 to
set it up. This gets an IP address, perfectly fine, and sets up the
gateway, dns, etc... and I can ping the gateway, and also, the DNS
resolution is working, as a ping to an external address shows an IP
it's trying to hit, but no packets ever come back. tcpdump shows only
outgoing, never anything coming back.

dmesg shows:
duplicate IP address 10.1.10.199 sent from ethernet address
00:02:a5:26:fc:b3

which makes me thing that this IP address seems to have been also
assigned to another computer/device

Now I'm really wondering, why is this happening? booting up in a linux
livecd gets the same IP, but it works perfectly fine.

is there something I'm doing wrong? This is extremely frustrating
(having to cart around a big pccard NIC kind of takes away from the
subnotebook effect)....

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-16-2008, 08:10 AM
Joachim Schipper
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: dhclient getting address that (it seems) belongs to another NIC, all packets dropped

dbpatterson <dbpatt@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have an IBM X40 with an Intel NIC, shows up as:
> em0 at pci1 dev 1 function 0 "Intel PRO/1000MT Mobile (82541GI)" rev
> 0x00: irq 11, address 00:0a:e4:2b:0e:63
>
> I'm in a little NAT'd subnet, controlled by dhcp. So I dhclient em0 to
> set it up. This gets an IP address, perfectly fine, and sets up the
> gateway, dns, etc... and I can ping the gateway, and also, the DNS
> resolution is working, as a ping to an external address shows an IP
> it's trying to hit, but no packets ever come back. tcpdump shows only
> outgoing, never anything coming back.
>
> dmesg shows:
> duplicate IP address 10.1.10.199 sent from ethernet address
> 00:02:a5:26:fc:b3
>
> which makes me thing that this IP address seems to have been also
> assigned to another computer/device
>
> Now I'm really wondering, why is this happening? booting up in a linux
> livecd gets the same IP, but it works perfectly fine.
>
> is there something I'm doing wrong? This is extremely frustrating
> (having to cart around a big pccard NIC kind of takes away from the
> subnotebook effect)....


You should be looking up what lives on 10.1.10.199, 00:02:a5:26:fc:b3.
If there's actually something there, OpenBSD is right, the DHCP server
is configured wrong [1], and Linux just happened to work for the time
you tried.

For what it's worth, 00:02:a5:26:fc:b3 is assigned to Compaq, and it is
not entirely unlikely that you'll find a Compaq-made card in a
Compaq-made computer.

net/arping can verify that the MAC address is in use; net/nmap might
give a clue about what services and possible OS is running on this
machine. Try getting a non-duplicate IP and then running, as root, nmap
-T4 -A 10.1.10.199 [2]. This should give a result like

# nmap -T4 -A 192.168.14.2

Starting Nmap 4.20 ( http://insecure.org ) at 2007-08-20 11:31 CEST
Interesting ports on melpomene.jschipper.dynalias.net (192.168.14.2):
Not shown: 1694 closed ports
PORT STATE SERVICE VERSION
22/tcp open ssh OpenSSH 4.6 (protocol 2.0)
25/tcp open smtp
6000/tcp open X11 (access denied)
1 service unrecognized despite returning data. If you know the
service/version, please submit the following fingerprint at
http://www.insecure.org/cgi-bin/servicefp-submit.cgi :
SF-Port25-TCP:V=4.20%I=7%D=8/20%Time=46C95FBF%P=i386-unknown-openbsd4.1%r(
SF:NULL,5C,"220\x20melpomene\.jschipper\.dynalias\ .net\x20ESMTP\x20server\
SF:.\x20Welcome!\x20Abuse\x20will\x20get\x20you\x2 0in\x20trouble\.\r\n")%r
SFHelp,85,"220\x20melpomene\.jschipper\.dynalias \.net\x20ESMTP\x20server
SF:\.\x20Welcome!\x20Abuse\x20will\x20get\x20you\x 20in\x20trouble\.\r\n502
SF:\x205\.5\.2\x20Error:\x20command\x20not\x20reco gnized\r\n");
Device type: general purpose
Running (JUST GUESSING) : OpenBSD 3.X|4.X (96%)
Aggressive OS guesses: OpenBSD 3.9 - 4.0 (96%), OpenBSD 4.0 (x86) (92%),
OpenBSD 4.0 (CURRENT) macppc (89%), OpenBSD 4.0 (sparc64) (89%), OpenBSD
3.4 (x86) (87%)
No exact OS matches for host (test conditions non-ideal).
Network Distance: 0 hops
Service Info: OS: Unix

OS and Service detection performed. Please report any incorrect results
at http://insecure.org/nmap/submit/ .
Nmap finished: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 78.050 seconds

which can tell you quite a bit. In this case, we even find the hostname
as reverse DNS works ('Interesting ports on
melpomene.jschipper.dynalias.net (192.168.14.2)'); however, as this
might not be the case, do note that there are other ways of discovering
the hostname.
Many services will (might) give out the hostname when you connect; if
SSH works and you can log in, that's probably easiest, but you can get
hostnames from protocols like FTP, SMTP, and sometimes HTTP as well (try
looking for http://10.1.10.199/any-nonexistent-page). In this case, my
custom mail server header confused nmap, but the hostname is easily
found - the 'unrecognized fingerprint' reads
"melpomene.jschipper.dynalias.net ESMTP server. Welcome! Abuse will get
you in trouble.".

OS detection is imperfect - this machine runs -current, aka OpenBSD
4.2-beta - but it did get the 'OpenBSD' part right.

Of course, it *is* possible that there is some horrible OpenBSD bug that
makes OpenBSD believe that the address is in use when it's not. But that
is not the most likely scenario...

Joachim

[1] Or the people setting up the DHCP server don't know about
10.1.10.199, which some guy might have set up with a static IP for some
reason.
[2] This almost certainly won't crash the host, your network, or kill
kittens. but you do get to keep the pieces. System administrators tend
to be nervous when seeing nmap, as quickly taking stock of a network is
something that crackers like to do, too. If you don't want to or can not
use nmap, 'nc 10.1.10.199 <port>', from another IP, is a bit less
convenient but gives the same result.
Also, -T4 specifies that nmap should scan pretty quickly. If you want to
ease network load, use a lower number.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-16-2008, 08:10 AM
dbpatterson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: dhclient getting address that (it seems) belongs to another NIC, all packets dropped

Hmm, okay I ran the scan (when on a different network card with a
different IP), and I get 0 ports open, basically no information except
that it is indeed up. (and that it is a card registered to compaq).

what's funny is this seems like it is obviously wrong, and something
is up, but every time I start up in linux it works perfectly. Perhaps
the linux box is managing to take over that IP with some kind of ARP
magic, I'm not sure.

knowing this (which I had kind of suspected), is the best solution to
just do a static configuration with a known free IP (the one that is
saved for my pc card NIC) ? or is there some way to force the server
to give me a unique IP?

anyway, thanks for the help.

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-16-2008, 08:10 AM
Joachim Schipper
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: dhclient getting address that (it seems) belongs to another NIC, all packets dropped

dbpatterson <dbpatt@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmm, okay I ran the scan (when on a different network card with a
> different IP), and I get 0 ports open, basically no information except
> that it is indeed up. (and that it is a card registered to compaq).
>
> what's funny is this seems like it is obviously wrong, and something
> is up, but every time I start up in linux it works perfectly. Perhaps
> the linux box is managing to take over that IP with some kind of ARP
> magic, I'm not sure.
>
> knowing this (which I had kind of suspected), is the best solution to
> just do a static configuration with a known free IP (the one that is
> saved for my pc card NIC) ? or is there some way to force the server
> to give me a unique IP?


If you cannot find the device which causes the problems, the best bet
would probably be configuring the DHCP server not to hand out that
particular address (configuring your new machine with a static address
is a temporary solution at best, and likely to break at an inconvenient
time).

This, of course, depends on the DHCP server you use; if you use
OpenBSD's, dhcpd.conf(5) documents the 'range' option, which may
apparently be given multiple times. This would allow you to isolate the
IP in question. (The 'host' directive may or may not work, either, but
I'm not sure that's less ugly.) Do read the docs before configuring, as
I'm not particularly experienced with tricky DHCP setups.

Joachim
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
UnixAdminTalk.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965