okay but youll still have downtime, plus youd need to try and replicate every server IP. possible i guess if you export the DHCP database routinely?
Server DHCP Adresses
- Thread starter Burnsy2023
- Start date
okay but youll still have downtime, plus youd need to try and replicate every server IP. possible i guess if you export the DHCP database routinely?
Not necessarily - have 2 running servers with non-overlapping scopes
true i guess thatd worth with matching reservations on each.
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,746
- Location
- Southampton, UK
But conveluted though. What would be the benefits?
over static server IPs? nothing that i can think of.
edit - i guess itd make batch changing of gateways, DNS servers easier..
it'd keep clients running too having the extra DHCP but theyll still need to refresh their IP.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 1,890
- Location
- South London
When you say DHCP addresses on a server interface what do you mean?
the server interface is using DHCP for it's address or the address of the interface is in the DHCP pool.
If the later, lots of IP conflict related issues
some of which can be really weird and entertaining to see.
If the former it shouldn't cause tooooo many issues provided your Fileserver isn't the primary DNS server for the domain (which is probably is). As the server in theory is never shut down it should maintain that address and DHCP-DNS linkage should keep things running. However this assumes obviosuly that hosts are not using said server for DNS, all network UNC paths use the FQDN not the IP or short hostname.
It'd work.... possibly. 100x more work to do in order to get it to though. And as for best practice.....nah
Personally I'd have told him to GTFO, but ridiculing him on the internet is the next best thing
the server interface is using DHCP for it's address or the address of the interface is in the DHCP pool.
If the later, lots of IP conflict related issues
some of which can be really weird and entertaining to see.If the former it shouldn't cause tooooo many issues provided your Fileserver isn't the primary DNS server for the domain (which is probably is). As the server in theory is never shut down it should maintain that address and DHCP-DNS linkage should keep things running. However this assumes obviosuly that hosts are not using said server for DNS, all network UNC paths use the FQDN not the IP or short hostname.
It'd work.... possibly. 100x more work to do in order to get it to though. And as for best practice.....nah
Personally I'd have told him to GTFO, but ridiculing him on the internet is the next best thing
Originally Posted by iaind
Not necessarily - have 2 running servers with non-overlapping scopes
true i guess thatd worth with matching reservations on each.
Yep, along with excluding what's available on one scope, and vice versa...
we do this but we just spilt the client subnet into 2 scopes and assign one to each dhcp server. Doesn't matter then if one goes down or is taken offline as the scope is big enough on each server to serve all of the clients on the site.