I'll definitely email you / post back when i get back to it. I need to through our change control process request which will be at least a week before I will be able to start working on it again. I hope this "solution" works! ""W. Alan Robertson"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > So did it work? I've been waiting all day to hear... :) > > Alan~ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kenneth" > To: > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 7:38 AM > Subject: Re: Repost: GIADDR and Secondary Interface problems - help > [7:6741] > > > > Thanks Alan. > > > > Yeah, we do have a maintenance window for this so rebooting is not > really a > > problem except I'm targeting 104 weeks of uptime!!! :-) Guess > that'll have > > to wait another 104 weeks > > > > I'll give the 1st 2 ideas a try first and hopefully that fixes their > > problem. > > > > Thanks for the help, you guys have been great!!! > > > > Kenneth > > > > > > ""W. Alan Robertson"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > Kenneth, > > > > > > It sounds to me like a bug... Have you checked the Cisco bug > > > database? > > > > > > Short of that, here's what I'd do: > > > > > > First, remove the ip helper-address from the interface, and then > add > > > it again... See what happpens. It's possible that the ip > > > helper-address function checks the interfaces primary IP address > when > > > the command is added, but has no mechanism to check it again after > > > being initialized. > > > > > > If that doesn't work, I'd remove it again, shut down the > interface, > > > bring the interface back up, and then add the help address again. > > > > > > As a last resort, reloading the router should clear the problem, > but I > > > understand your reluctance to do so... 100% uptime is a noble > > > pursuit, but there's no avoiding maintenance. I don't suppose you > > > have a maintenance window, do you? > > > > > > Hope this helps... > > > > > > Alan > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Kenneth" > > > To: > > > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 9:10 PM > > > Subject: Repost: GIADDR and Secondary Interface problems - help > > > [7:6695] > > > > > > > > > > Hi, guys. It's been a while since I've posted something here but > I'm > > > pretty > > > > stumped with this problem somehow. Anyway, here's my problem: > > > > > > > > Remote office subnet: 192.168.5.0 255.255.255.0 > > > > Plan to change subnet into 192.168.19.0 255.255.255.0 > > > > Router relaying dhcp requests to 192.168.1.11 (DHCP Server in > > > Central site) > > > > Current fa0/0 interface on LAN: 192.168.5.1 255.255.255.0 > > > > > > > > I recently configured the interface to have > > > > 192.168.19.1 as its primary address > > > > 192.168.5.1 as its secondary address > > > > > > > > On the DHCP Server, I've deleted the 192.168.5.0 scope and > activated > > > the > > > > 192.168.19.0 scope > > > > > > > > The reason I have 2 ip addresses on the FastEthernet interface > of > > > the router > > > > is to allow people who haven't rebooted their computer to still > be > > > able to > > > > access email and services at the central site and print to their > > > local LAN > > > > LPR printers... > > > > > > > > The problem I'm having is that once the computers have rebooted, > and > > > I did a > > > > debug ip dhcp server events, packets, linkage, I keep seeing the > > > router > > > > still setting the GIADDR of the request as 192.168.5.1 ... since > > > it's > > > > forwarding this information, the DHCP server on the central site > > > wasn't > > > > responding because of the non-existence of the 192.168.5.0 scope > > > > > > > > Reading Cisco's documentation, I thought the router uses the > primary > > > ip > > > > address of the interface as its GIADDR? > > > > > > > > I have read something about ip dhcp smart-relay but I doubt it > > > applies to > > > > this problem... > > > > > > > > BTW, this is the way that it should be done and I know a lot of > > > people hate > > > > the "secondary" ip address but I'm really trying to make this > change > > > as > > > > transparent to the users as possible! > > > > > > > > Thanks guys! > > > > > > > > Kenneth > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6945&t=6945 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
