3.1.1 Failover Speed (was: Re: 4.1.0a1 Failover sync speed)
cra at WPI.EDU
Thu May 29 15:23:12 UTC 2008
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:03:42AM -0400, Michael Kaegler wrote:
>> Best practise says that you should not have fixed-address devices
>> inside your dynamic ranges.
> Not an option at the moment, random addresses were allocated from all over
> the subnet in the old system. We'd have literally hundreds of pool
> statements (x140 subnets. Unworkable.)
It would be fairly easy to programmatically alter the config file to
split the ranges around the fixed-addresses.
> But like I said, this is tested working. Despite what you're both saying,
> practical testing has shown that an address in a pool will not be handed
> out if there is a fixed-address statement for it.
That goes against every recommendation, documentation, and experience
I have ever seen. Of course, the code is the final authority on this.
I haven't looked at the code myself, but I've seen the authors of the
code say that your experience isn't enforced by the code.
More information about the dhcp-users