Interesting. Might be fun (in a dorky networking kind of way) to look at a packet capture of it. Maybe the client doesn't like the lease time, or it's tied into DDNS somehow. I looked a bit, and found in the RFC (http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2131.html) a blurb about lease times:
"The client may ask for a permanent assignment by asking for an infinite lease. Even when assigning "permanent" addresses, a server may choose to give out lengthy but non-infinite leases to allow detection of the fact that the client has been retired. " I've seen those infinite leases before, never cared enough to look into it. Might be interesting to find out why though... Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Justin Shore [mailto:jus...@justinshore.com] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 2:11 PM To: Church, Charles Cc: Manaf Al Oqlah; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] DHCP Binding Expiration Church, Charles wrote: > Aren't those BOOTP clients that don't understand the concept of an > expiration? Once when I was curious (and very bored) I tracked a couple of them down. One was a Windows XP machine and the other was a fairly new D-Link router/firewall CPE (which we have hundreds on our network). I don't know if either of them support Bootp but I would expect this problem to come up more often if that was the case. I'm trying to think of what our customers would have on our edges that would support Bootp. Nothing comes to mind. I'm sure you can configure some older clients to do Bootp of course (Macs still support it if you intentionally configure it that way) but no major demographic comes to mind. I can certainly be missing something though. Justin _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
