DHCP pair messed up, second one only running cant get primary up.
rmorin at datavalet.com
Sat Jan 14 07:23:22 UTC 2017
Our lease time is governed by our client, which is huge. That cannot be changed. :)
Gestionnaire des systèmes | Senior System administrator
T 514 385-4448 #174 DATAVALET.COM
5275, chemin Queen-Mary, Montréal (Québec) H3W 1Y3 Canada
CE COURRIEL AINSI QUE CES DOCUMENTS JOINTS peuvent contenir des renseignements confidentiels et privilégiés. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire désigné, veuillez nous en informer immédiatement et effacer toute copie. Merci.
THIS EMAIL AND THE DOCUMENTS ATTACHED may contain privileged or confidential information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original message. Thank you.
From: dhcp-users [mailto:dhcp-users-bounces at lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Simon Hobson
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 3:31 PM
To: Users of ISC DHCP <dhcp-users at lists.isc.org>
Subject: Re: DHCP pair messed up, second one only running cant get primary up.
Rob Morin <rmorin at datavalet.com> wrote:
> Also the dhcpd.leases files grow too big for the /ramdisk, so we are each 10 mins catting /dev/null into /ramdisk/dhcpd.lease! file to save space.
I can't help with the other problems, but pray you don't have to stop the DHCP server at any time before it's re-written the compacted leases file ! Losing the leases file is "bad" in a big way.
I can't help with the specific problem, but I would suggest that if you lengthen the lease time (by a considerable amount) it will dramatically reduce the rate of growth of the leases file. With a lease length of 20 minutes, you'll have a renewal every 10 minutes (roughly) - so that's 6 lease updates to the leases file per hour !
For example, if you were to increase the lease time to (say) 4 hours, then your leases file would contain one record per lease (in practical terms, every address in your pools) plus one update for roughly 1/2 the active clients.
So your lease file size will change from total of IP ranges + 6x number of active clients, to total of IP ranges plus 1/2 the active clients.
Is there a reason for having such short leases ? It's quite short, longer leases bring much stability and much more leeway in dealing with DHCPO service issues !
Also, for consideration, you can have more than 2 servers in failover - but only 2 per pool. So it's possible to have (say) 3 servers sharing the load as A+B, B+C, and C+A. More complexity, but more scope for server failure without losing DHCP service - and more load sharing. Of course, you can also just split pools across an even number of servers as A+B, C+D, etc.
dhcp-users mailing list
dhcp-users at lists.isc.org
More information about the dhcp-users