Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'DHCP Lease Renewal' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
DHCP Lease Renewal
Authored by: tomdarch on May 10, '02 01:22:35AM
I'm getting similar problems with 169.x.x.x

I've got a DSL line running through an ethernet switch.

When I first hooked up my new powerbook it got a good address, but after disconnecting it then reconnecting it later, it hasn't yet been able to get a good address. When I only had os9 on my B&W G3 it had the same problem - I tried trashing the TCP/IP prefs, to no avail! Now that I've upgraded the B&W, it got a bad address the first time I tried connecting. I switched to PPP in the Network panel, hit "Apply Now", switched back to DHCP, hit "Apply Now", and it momentarily showed 0.0.X.X, then got a good address. Interestingly, when I get a bad (169.x.x.x) address, the subnet mask is set to 255.255.0.0 and I don't get a router address.

Could this be a problem with the DHCP server? Is there a file to edit or trash in OS X that has DHCP settings or info? Does Apple's use of DHCP with AirPort have anything to do with this?



[ Reply to This | # ]
DHCP Lease Renewal
Authored by: Myrddin on Jun 04, '03 11:26:45PM

I personally would like to know what the answer is... I don't shut my system down and would perfer to put it to sleep but getting a 169.x.x.x address instead of the proper router DNS address is a pain.



[ Reply to This | # ]
DHCP Lease Renewal
Authored by: germsteel on Jul 05, '03 03:49:27AM

Check to see if you have set your router with enough IP addresses to hand out. Something that says starting IP address range to ending IP address.

My router hands me a new internal IP address and doesn't purge the old one for a little while.

Good luck.



[ Reply to This | # ]
DHCP Lease Renewal
Authored by: anti-os on Nov 04, '04 05:58:46PM

Sounds like another case of an open transport issue. Funny thing if this was a "standard" wireless device (res. gateway) it wouldn't try pushing a 169.x.x.x ip first and wouldn't cause things to screw up. Just like OS10.x open transport problems.

Hmm... do I see a pattern forming here!

R.



[ Reply to This | # ]