DHCP don't acknowledges more than 80 users??

Martin Hochreiter linuxbox at wavenet.at
Fri Dec 5 08:54:26 UTC 2008

> I thought you had to explicitly set a server to "partner down" state 
> for it to take over all addresses. This is because there are faults 
> that can result in both servers being up and able to communicate with 
> clients, but not communicate with each other - therefore you cannot 
> assume that just because you can't talk to the partner, it's down.
No I didn't set a server to "partner down". What we wanted to know is 
the exact behaviour of a server failure.
Each of the dhcpd server should be able to take over the whole dhcp 
lease serving without any user interaction or
am I wrong here?
(Then I have to run the test again with setting the secondary explicitly 
down on the primary)

- The curious thing is, the Suse Linux Enterprise dhcpd (3.0.3) runs as 
primary in peer-failover configuration without
  that problem. Only the self compiled 3.0.5 on the Cent OS 5.2 is not 
able to serv the leases in a partner-down situation.

I don't have any hint what is really wrong here ...
I will try to compile a much higher version of dhcpd but a knock out 
criteria is the
ldap support, and I didn't read anything about a ldap support in dhcpd 
4++ so i am
afraid i have to use the 3.xxx series with the ldap patch (and hopefully 
a solution for the serving problem)


More information about the dhcp-users mailing list