Wolfgang-
This is what happens when you use the 'default-lease-time -1' option?
That would answer my question, then. If there is no true "lease" per
se, and the only record of the address assignment is in the dhcpd.conf
file, then even merely telling dhcpd to reread its conf file would be
enough to handle the case of changing NICs in a client.
So, if this is true, I think we could safely add (properly nested, of
course) the 'default-lease-time -1' option to the dhcpd.conf.example
file that is shipped with LTSP.
Jim,
It's ultimately your decision. How to you feel about this step? Does
it make sense? Is it worth it for the rare case when the DHCP server
cannot be relied upon?
Jason
> Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 18:28:03 +0100 (CET)
> From: Wolfgang Schweer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Ltsp-discuss] DHCP question
>
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, Jason Bechtel wrote:
>>Okay, but what about just sending it the signal to reread its
>>configuration file (SIGUSR1, SIGUSR2, or whatever it prefers)? Will
>>this also be enough to release the infinitely assigned address? If so,
>>then we have an excellent, foolproof and "tight" solution to one of the
>>small problems that currently exist with LTSP.
>>
>>I don't administer any DHCP servers at the moment, so I can't test this.
>>
>
> At work (school) I've got to manage three DHCP servers.
> None of them has any entry in the servers leases file concerning clients
> with fixed addresses, only clients with dynamically assigned addresses get
> entries. Infinite lease time means IMHO, that the client will no longer
> ask for renewal.
>
> Wolfgang
_____________________________________________________________________
Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss
For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on irc.openprojects.net
