Problem with "corrupt" lease file
mike at sepia.com
Mon Jul 2 18:08:32 UTC 2007
True enough, and I should have. But as you know, it's when these
components break that they come up on the radar. For dhcp I had no
difficulties upgrading to 3.0.5, but there are a number of other system
components we use that may have dependencies I can't handle, such as
kernel changes. I can't change the kernels we are running in the field
(about 400 sites geographically dispersed, about 60,000 end users)
unless it's absolutely necessary, so of course we tend to leave working
things untouched. I should have watched dhcpd more carefully, and I
will. In fact, I've been looking over the new 4.0 version.
Now I'm off to upgrade dhcp at 400 sites without anyone noticing. You
can imagine I don't want to do that every day.
Thanks for the support. I appreciate it very much.
David W. Hankins wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 12:01:08PM -0400, Mike Schmidt wrote:
>> The problem is that often, on production systems, it can be very
>> difficult to change a component as critical as dhcpd, so having a clear
>> definition can provide a way around the problem.
> But you were running 3.0pl1 (May, 2002)...even 3.0pl2, which is a
> security patch, was released in Jan 2003.
> Surely, in 4.5 years, you could have at least upgraded to the
> security patch, if not tracked the maintenance?
More information about the dhcp-users