third server

Glenn Satchell Glenn.Satchell at
Wed Feb 20 12:38:46 UTC 2008

>Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:57:46 +0100
>From: "Tom Schmitt" <TomSchmitt at>
>Subject: Re: third server
>To: dhcp-users at
>-------- Original-Nachricht --------
>> Datum: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 21:16:31 +1100 (EST)
>> Von: Glenn Satchell <Glenn.Satchell at>
>> An: dhcp-users at
>> Betreff: Re: third server
>> >> i got a third location where I want to build up a DHCP-server.
>> >> My question is: Is it possible, that one server is the failoverpartner
>> >> for more than one server?
>> >> 
>> >
>> >Absolutely. One server can have several failover sessions - towards
>> >different servers, or even towards the same server if that is useful.
>> >
>> Each failover pool can only have two servers, but you can have more
>> than one failover pair. So for example pool X can have servers 1 and 2,
>> pool Y can have servers 2 and 3, pool Z can have server 1 and 3.
>> I have also set up a star-type setup with one central server pairing
>> with a local server in each site. Each of the site dhcp servers is a
>> server for only the local pool, but the central server is a partner for
>> all pools.
>Thank you both for the information.
>Is this valid for isc-dhcpd version 3.0.3 too, or do I have to switch first to 
version 3.1?
>Regarding the star-topologie you mentioned: How did you managed it, that in the 
normal work the local dhcp-server would serve the most clients?

This is still running on 3.0.3 last time I visited. Would probably work
on 3.0.1 :)

For the star topology we left the split as 128, just the local server
usually answered first because it was closer. The logic behind this was
that if the WAN link went down then the office wouldn't be left without
any DHCP service.


More information about the dhcp-users mailing list