best version for new failover setup?
glenn.satchell at uniq.com.au
Wed Sep 7 13:01:07 UTC 2011
On 09/07/11 06:59, sthaug at nethelp.no wrote:
>> What is the recommended version for a new failover setup? We tend to like
>> to be off the leading edge on this kind of stuff around here; stability
>> trumps new features and being up-to-the-minute. Any reason to STOP using
>> isc-dhcpd-V3.0.5-RedHat ? That's what I'm running now. Any failover bugs
>> back in the 3's?
3.0.5 is veyr flakey for failover, and you really want something newer
than 3.0.x. There are many problems with synchronisation of leases
between servers and maintaining updates.
>> I recall a while back hearing of some kind of issue with 4 and failover that
>> was resolved by going back to 3, but can't find it in the archives. So if I
>> were to upgrade from 3.0.5 I'm leaning toward DHCP 3.1-ESV-R3 . Any reason
>> I should prefer DHCP 4.1-ESV-R3 instead?
> 3.x has no support for DHCPv6. 4.x does. Is DHCPv6 important for you?
> Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug at nethelp.no
For me the 4.1.x versions have been very stable, and compatible with the
3.x dhcpd.conf syntax. 4.1 is still one step off the bleeding edge of
4.2 and would be where I'd aim while looking at stability. I haven't
checked recently, but I think RH6 uses 4.1.something?
More information about the dhcp-users