On Tue, Oct 01, 2024 at 12:34:31PM +0300, Kapetanakis Giannis wrote:
>
> On 01/10/2024 08:36, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 10:50:06PM +0300, Kapetanakis Giannis wrote:
> >
> >> How did you solve the problem of initial sync?
> >>
> >> Suppose one server goes down for maintenanc
On 01/10/2024 08:36, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 10:50:06PM +0300, Kapetanakis Giannis wrote:
>
>> How did you solve the problem of initial sync?
>>
>> Suppose one server goes down for maintenance. When it comes up it does not
>> know what new leases have been given by the othe
On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 10:50:06PM +0300, Kapetanakis Giannis wrote:
> How did you solve the problem of initial sync?
>
> Suppose one server goes down for maintenance. When it comes up it does not
> know what new leases have been given by the other server which was all the
> time up.
>
> There a
I did this in datacenters with
multiple DHCP servers. Had to write them from scratch to accomodate clients
requirements There were absolutely no issues with several replies
hitting clients (think thousands of servers).
The fastest reply to be received
after initial request - wins.
Each request a
How did you solve the problem of initial sync?
Suppose one server goes down for maintenance. When it comes up it does
not know what new leases have been given by the other server which was
all the time up.
There are chances that later it gives an IP already given by the other
dhcp server. Th
On 2024-09-30, Luca Di Gregorio wrote:
> So my conclusions are that:
> 1: multiple DHCP offers from multiple dhcpd's are not a problem
> 2: synchronization of N dhcp servers (with -y and -Y ) is useful to keep
> the same address
> for the same client even if the previous (stored on the client
> I thought that receiving multiple DHCPOFFERs could cause
> problems on the client, but I see in RFC2131:
Well, we ran a university on two dhcpds which both held all static
entries, and then they had 50% of the dynamic each so most of the
clients were using fixed mac -> ip mappings and we never s
> Den mån 30 sep. 2024 kl 10:57 skrev Luca Di Gregorio :
> > I'm trying to figure out how to configure a redundant dhcp server.
>
> If you stick to static entries for your hosts on the network, you can
> just set up N+1 dhcp daemons that answer the same (because their conf
> would be the same) and
Den mån 30 sep. 2024 kl 10:57 skrev Luca Di Gregorio :
> I'm trying to figure out how to configure a redundant dhcp server.
If you stick to static entries for your hosts on the network, you can
just set up N+1 dhcp daemons that answer the same (because their conf
would be the same) and the clients
I'm trying to figure out how to configure a redundant dhcp server.
In dhcpd(8) I see that the options -y and -Y implement "synchronisation of
the
lease allocations to a number of dhcpd daemons", anyway, in dhcpd.conf(5)
I can't find anywhere any statement that sets the dhcp server as 'primary'
or
10 matches
Mail list logo
