randomizing lease renewal?

Scott Helms khelms at zcorum.com
Fri Mar 30 18:01:42 UTC 2007

> If a client starts downloading a large file that takes 8 hours to 
> download, but they are forced to change their IP every 4 hours, then 
> they will never be able to download the whole file.  Their client will 
> keep retrying (restarting from the beginning if the client or the 
> protocol doesn't support resume functionality) causing unnecessary 
> load on the server.  This is pretty bad for the Internet.

Now, bear in mind that my point of view is entirely based around
Internet access and not LAN administration.  Having said that, the
concept of an 8 hour download is pretty far fetched and one that can't
be managed by a download manager is even less likely.  Again, I ask the
question, how is forcing a client to acquire a new IP address any more
harmful than having a cable, DSL, or wireless connection drop offline?
Now, to use your example, I completely agree that the concept of having
everyone be forced to a new IP address on a short timer would be
inefficient and not helpful.  Having said that, there are lots of ways
of building inefficient networks :)

In short, I think the argument that says a network administrator
shouldn't have a tool because some network admins might not use it in an
intelligent fashion is pretty weak given that the same admin can use (or
misuses) other tools to create the same inefficiency.  Again, I don't
write ISC and I don't intend to slight the people that do, I'm simply
expressing my opinion.  I think that OSS loses when we decide that a
feature isn't "moral" to include since closed source vendors don't have
the same compunction, especially given that I don't think this exclusion
actually accomplishes anything other than forcing people to other
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ISP Alliance, Inc. DBA ZCorum
(678) 507-5000

More information about the dhcp-users mailing list