New answers tagged dhcp
This is actually correct behavior. It is supposed to prevent a case where your primary server may crash before performing a lazy update to the secondary. You can read the 5.2.1 section of the dhc failover protocol if you want but the relevant quote is: "This allows that server to give a longer lease time to the client the next time the client ...
You could add a cron job which checks the IP Address, and restarts systemd-networkd if it has one in the 192.168.100.0/24 range
I don't know if this will fix the problem completely, but for starters your router needs to be located on the same subnet. 192.168.1.100 is not within 192.168.2.0/255.255.255.0. If the lease were to be granted as you've configured it, the client would have no path to reach 192.168.1.100 which is on a different subnet.
Were you guys able to dynamic updates working via linux dhclient? I can get forward maps to update # service network restart Apr 7 15:25:24 i-d40976dd dhclient: Added new forward map from i-d40976dd.example.com. to 10.1.133.33 _ # dig i-d40976dd.example.com. ; <<>> DiG 9.8.2rc1-RedHat-9.8.2-0.23.rc1.el6_5.1 <<>> ...
Have you tried upgrading the firmware? We've had DHCP problems with 4.0 MR3 firmware and that was fixed with a firmware upgrade. Also, we have a DHCP server on the fortigate just for IPsec clients and it works normally.
I too agree that configuring a DHCP relay agent is probably the right way to go about this. Multi-homing a Windows server is generally not a recommended configuration except in very specific use cases.
I would definitely lean towards the relay agent. While it may not be a huge concern, giving the server a NIC into that network will open up more possible security vulnerabilities (or will require more effort to lock that server's firewall down a little more. Another benefit of using the DHCP Relay is that if for some reason you need to switch your DHCP ...
You could also just let your switch be the DHCP server as well. Multi-homing Windows is frequently a bad idea. Unless you do it perfectly right you can have weird DNS and routing issues. You are better off using a relay agent.
In the GUI at least you don't get any additional options, you basically have to open the properties of the reservation. Since it's 2012, you could use: Get-DhcpServerv4Reservation or Get-DhcpServerv6Reservation in Powershell with whatever parameters are available with the command or just the | fl. ...
I believe this is possible according to this article. You can set allow/deny filters for the scopes within DHCP. The article is for 2008R2, but I don't see why it wouldn't also be available in 2012.
Enable portfast on all the ports. Without portfast, there is a fairly long delay between when a port comes up versus when it can start passing traffic. This is long enough that most DHCP implementations will time out.
1 - Is there a limit to the number of DHCP Scopes I can deploy to a Windows Server 2012 R2 server? If there is, I'll need to consider adding more DHCP servers now. According to this: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windowsserver/en-US/759becd0-9fbe-44e6-aac8-6f50036294c2/windows-2008-r2-x64-dhcp-server-maximum-scope-?forum=winserverNIS There is ...
Top 50 recent answers are included