Re: udhcpd question Debian squeeze

On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 01:14:41 -0600
Trev Peterson <[email protected]> wrote:

> The suggestion from Craig works fine for continually connected hosts
> but is not great when you throw laptops and portables (netbooks,
> phones, etc) into the mix.  Having the static IP assignments all done
> through the DHCP server documents allocated addresses in a
> predictable location. Just something to keep in mind.
> 
> Even though busybox can do dhcp I prefer to still go with using ISC's
> DHCPD.   I'd bet it's better documented and I've found it to be very
> stable (it's beat dnsmasq for me in the dhcp realm).  Try some out and
> see what works reliably for you.
> 
> Hope this helps,
> 
> On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 21:40 -0500, Craig Van Tassle wrote:
> 
> > Why not just program them with static IP addresses? 
> > Go for the KISS Method. Dont relay on a process that can fail, or
> > cause weird issues that you move you stuff around. Can they be set
> > with a static ip address?
> > 
> > I have used the method you are trying here. It's caused issues when
> > the DHCP server decided to crazy on me. Cause me a lot of issues
> > when that happens. It's not fun trying to trace down a dhcp
> > configured device to only to find out that your dhcp server blew up
> > on you.
> > 
> 


Trev,

I actually run a mixed DHCP and Static IP environment both at home and
at work. That way devices like laptops, Smartphone, my Wii all get DHCP
addresses but my servers, routers and various other devices are all
given dynamic IP's. I also have setup DHCPD to register the names with
DNS to make my life a lot easier lol. It also lets me bring. A little
bit of planning ahead and I was able to lob off a /25 for my DHCP
area. I have one area that is for my servers, one that is for my
networing devices like my AP, and my IPv6 Router and my firewall. 

-- 
Linux Users Of Northern Illinois (Chicago) - Technical Discussion 
http://luni.org/mailman/listinfo/luni