Performance... no more than 150 leases per second?

[Simon Hobson]

Friesen, Don SSBC:EX wrote:

>    subnet 10.32.172.0 netmask 255.255.252.0 {
>       pool {
>           range 142.32.172.10 142.32.172.255;
>       }
>       pool {
>           range 142.32.173.0 142.32.173.255;
>       }
>       pool {
>           range 142.32.174.0 142.32.174.255;
>       }
>        pool {
>           range 142.32.175.0 142.32.175.254;
>       }
>    }

Also, it is sometimes suggested you should not include .0 and .255 in 
your ranges. Believe it or not, some software developers still cannot 
grasp those as being a valid address for a device to have - everyone 
**knows** than .0 is the network and .255 the broadcast address, and 
at my last job I worked with some supposedly professional network 
people who couldn't grasp the error in that :-/

I don't know if any DHCP clients still have a problem, but I know of 
one well known manufacturer of routers (popular in the consumer 
market) that does not accept .0 or .255 as valid when configuring a 
range of addresses to allow remote management from ! The mind boggles 
when you think how long classless routing has been the norm and some 
people still don't "get it".

Must go and practice being calm for a bit ...

-- 
Simon Hobson

Visit http://www.magpiesnestpublishing.co.uk/ for books by acclaimed
author Gladys Hobson. Novels - poetry - short stories - ideal as
Christmas stocking fillers. Some available as e-books.