Host declarations with fixed-address treated as unknown for dynamic pools?

[Ingen Schenau, Jeroen van (ICTS)]

Hi,

> We're in the process of replacing our old DHCP servers (dhcpd 3.0.7)
> with a newer version (4.2.1). While testing with our config, there seems
> to be a difference in behaviour that I don't understand...

Replying to myself here... we found a workaround, which is to insert all
entries requiring a fixed-address twice: once with the fixed-address
statement, the other without. This doesn't break operation for our old
servers and solves the problems with "unknown client" for dynamic pools
on our new servers.

> host host1 {hardware ethernet 00:a0:73:de:ad:01; fixed-address
> 192.168.1.2;}
> host host2 {hardware ethernet 00:a0:73:02:02:02; fixed-address
> 192.168.2.5;}
> host dyn1 {hardware ethernet 00:a0:73:fe:dc:ba;};

So our example hosts statements become:

host host1 {hardware ethernet 00:a0:73:de:ad:01; fixed-address
192.168.1.2;}
host host1dyn {hardware ethernet 00:a0:73:de:ad:01;} 
host host2 {hardware ethernet 00:a0:73:02:02:02; fixed-address 192.168.2.5;}
host host2dyn {hardware ethernet 00:a0:73:02:02:02;}
host dyn1 {hardware ethernet 00:a0:73:fe:dc:ba;};


Regards,

Jeroen van Ingen
ICT Service Centre
University of Twente, P.O.Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede, The Netherlands