[isalist] Re: OT: DHCP and static addresses
- From: "Greg Mulholland" <gmulholland@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 09:18:10 +1000 (EST)
http://www.ISAserver.org
-------------------------------------------------------
Having said that i have in previous times used dhcp. I keep DNS and DHCP
static and build all servers with dhcp. That way when i update DNS and
DHCP servers, which happened enough for it to be worthwhile, i only have
to do it in one spot and not across 30 servers.
Greg
> Well, yes - the gateway itself should have a fixed IP, and the gateway
> on your servers should be fixed as well (if they need that entry). But
> gateway's via DHCP is fine (and expected).
>
>
>
> t
>
>
>
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of D PIETRUSZKA USWRN INTERLINK INFRA ASST MGR
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 11:05 AM
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Re: OT: DHCP and static addresses
>
>
>
> Then I should change my gateway to fix ip, right? probably that will
> help with some issues I was experiencing on the network
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Diego R. Pietruszka
>
> MSC (USA) - Interlink Transport Technologies
>
>
>
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Thor (Hammer of God)
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 12:21 PM
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Re: OT: DHCP and static addresses
>
>
>
>
>
> My buck o' five-- (and not necessarily a reply to your post Tom)
>
>
>
> Best practices actually dictate that server resources NOT use DHCP, even
> if the address is reserved. In fact, some server services require
> static IP's (like, um, DHCP ;). This is because it creates a single
> point of failure against server resources, which, by their nature, are
> "static." When the end result is the same, that being the machine
> always getting the same IP address, having a server depend on another
> server (DHCP) just increases potential failure rates - particularly when
> multiple-system restarts present boot-order problems.
>
>
>
> The question you have to ask is "what do I gain by using reserved IP's
> in DHCP?" When it comes to servers, the answer is "nothing." In fact,
> you actually lose.
>
>
>
> DHCP is for clients... in networks of any consequence, you always have
> more than one DHCP server with non-overlapping scopes carved out within
> a given subnet even if you are using DHCP relay from off-subnet clients.
> In the case of clients, reservations are perfectly acceptable in cases
> when you need to easily and consistently match a given IP (as in logs,
> etc) to a specific client. You would make the reservation on all DHCP
> servers in scope for redundancy. There are any number of reasons one
> may choose to use reservations for clients, but as others have stated,
> any device with a primary purpose of hosting services should have a
> static IP so that it will always have it no matter what.
>
>
>
> t
>
>
>
>
>
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Thomas W Shinder
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 6:41 AM
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Re: OT: DHCP and static addresses
>
>
>
> I tend to avoid DHCP reservations for the same reason that Jim notes.
> They suffer from the same kind of network amnesia that hosts and lmhosts
> files have.
>
>
>
> Thomas W Shinder, M.D.
> Site: www.isaserver.org <http://www.isaserver.org/>
> Blog: http://blogs.isaserver.org/shinder/
> Book: http://tinyurl.com/3xqb7
> MVP -- Microsoft Firewalls (ISA)
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Harrison
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 8:09 AM
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Re: OT: DHCP and static addresses
>
> I prefer static for servers & devices (print servers, etc.);
> DHCP for all else..
>
> If you ever replace a server NIC and you forget to change the
> MAC in the DHCP reservation, your server could be unavailable until you
> either re-register the IP or fix the reservation.
>
> It's just a question of "how solid is your process control?"
>
>
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Amy Babinchak
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 5:49 AM
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Re: OT: DHCP and static addresses
>
>
>
> I always use the DHCP method. I don't know that there is a
> better. I think it's simply a choice.
>
>
>
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nathan
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 8:34 AM
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] OT: DHCP and static addresses
>
>
>
> To you network guys out there...
>
>
>
> When you give a device a static address, be it a server, switch,
> printer etc., do you think it is better to hardcode the address into the
> device or allocate the address using DHCP and the MAC address.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Nathan
>
>
> ExchangeDefender Message Security: Check Authenticity
> <http://www.exchangedefender.com/verify.asp?id=m0ADnXb6014228&from=amy@h
> arborcomputerservices.net>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------
List Archives: //www.freelists.org/archives/isalist/
ISA Server Newsletter: http://www.isaserver.org/pages/newsletter.asp
ISA Server Articles and Tutorials: http://www.isaserver.org/articles_tutorials/
ISA Server Blogs: http://blogs.isaserver.org/
------------------------------------------------------
Visit TechGenix.com for more information about our other sites:
http://www.techgenix.com
------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe visit http://www.isaserver.org/pages/isalist.asp
Report abuse to listadmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts:
