DHCP don't acknowledges more than 80 users??

Martin Hochreiter linuxbox at wavenet.at
Fri Dec 5 18:56:43 UTC 2008

> Both servers know about all existing leases other than any for which 
> the inter-server communcation
> may not have completed.  I admit I'm vague on what the servers do with 
> this info in communications
> interrupted mode: my guess is that either server will renew the lease 
> but not reuse the IP, thus exhibits
> some behavior that might be called "taking over", but not all.  I 
> invite others to chime in.
> I don't know specific differences between 3.0.3 and 3.0.5 or Suse 
> Linux Enterprise dhcpd.  What I _can_
> say is that state changes are logged, and it should, at minimum, be 
> easy to trace which state-behavior the
> server is intending to carry out.  For your analysis, besides tracing 
> an affected IP in the log, it can also be
> helpful to save some copies of the lease files while reproducing the 
> problem, and trace the IP in them
> during analysis.
> I also recall problems with dhcpd (3.0.3, I believe) that take IPs out 
> of service.  It has a problem
> with synchronizing the two daemons' state for the specific IP, and an 
> IP could become stuck in a state
> where neither daemon would lease.  This made pools act like they were 
> smaller than they really were.
> We run 3.0.4 now, which mitigates the problem as exhibited at our site 
> to tolerability and I believe
> subsequent dhcpd versions have improved things even more.  The problem 
> appeared to be
> exacerbated by lots of dhcpd restarts, something we do much much more 
> than many sites.  The issue
> was extremely clear once I began looking at individual IPs in the 
> lease file.
Ok, thank you for your hint here John I think I will follow the "lease 
file monitoring way" to clear up
our situation a little bit - the stupid thing is, that I can really test 
the servers only in production enviroment - and
my people are not really happy to not get an IP .. .what makes testing a 
little bit difficult ...

What I mentioned before - what I really want to do is to use the latest 
version of dhcpd - as I read
there are some advancements in failover behaviour but dhcpd 4.xxx does 
not have a ldap support  - neither
did I read about a patch for series 4.xxx ... so i am afraid to continue 

Again - thank you, some issues are much more understandable now

lg from austria

More information about the dhcp-users mailing list