DHCPD 4.0.0

Glenn Satchell Glenn.Satchell at uniq.com.au
Tue Feb 10 04:46:19 UTC 2009

>From: "Dean, Barry" <B.Dean at liverpool.ac.uk>
>To: "dhcp-users at isc.org" <dhcp-users at isc.org>
>Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 14:25:55 +0000
>I have recently completed a migration from 10 small NetBSD 3.1 based "servers" 
(old PCs!) with DHCPD 3.0.1rc11 arranged in 5 pairs (an installation I 
inherited) to 4 Solaris 10 based x4200 servers with DHCPD 4.0.0.
>We have noticed 2 problems since the migration.
>1) A annoyance
>	We have a log monitoring program and it spots lines of the form:
>	dhcpd: [ID 702911 daemon.error] uid lease w.x.y.z for client 
aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:ff is duplicate on <network>
>	And emails them to us as "unusual", be we see hundreds of them... Any 
idea why? The busier the day, the more of these messages we get. Looking at the 
UIDs in the leases file they look odd and I can't figure out how they are 
calculated, eg:
>	uid "\001\000\007\351\327sg";
>2) A show stopper!
>	Twice now we have had machines that have picked up a dynamic lease, then 
we have allocated a fixed lease, after doing do we see DHCPREQUESTs from the 
machine for the old dynamic lease followed by a:
>	DHCPREQUEST for w.x.y.z from aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:ff via e1000g2: lease 
w.x.y.z unavailable.
>	After which the server stops responding! Not good!
>I think I have asked about this before, but don't think we really got the root 
cause of either problem. Number 1 I can live with, number 2 results in much ear 
>To stop 2, do I have to remove dynamic leases before changing them to static 

Is your dhcp server authoritative? The default changed from yes to no
somewhere about 3.0.3 or so, so this would be one difference between
the two versions.

Add "authoritative yes;" to the global scope.

Also I've had some problems with 4.0.0 on Solaris 10, mostly with
responding to requests on local subnets. 3.0.x and 3.1.x have been rock
solid on that platform though.


More information about the dhcp-users mailing list