On 12/12/05, Peter Hessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:59:23 -0700 > Abraham Al-Saleh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > : On 12/12/05, Peter Hessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > : > : > : > : Moving the static entries to outside the range is unfeasable right > : > : now. And it doesn't address the issue of 'machine was on a > : > : different dhcp network with an address that happens to be > : > : staticly defined on ours'. > : > : > : > : Why does dhcpd give out addresses that are currently in use, and > : > : why does it give out staticly defined addresses? Shouldn't it > : > : remove the static entries from the dynamic pool? > : > : > : Because you're static ips are within your dynamic pool, just setup > : the static addresses so they're outside the dynamic range. Your > : server is misconfigured otherwise. > > > So its a feature, not a bug? Note the paragraph before the one you > addressed, it says "can't happen". > > Would adding such a feature (maybe off by default, but configurable in > command line/conf file) be accepted?
I don't know, but it sounds pretty useless to me, your issue is a misconfiguration. If you can't fix the misconfiguration, then it's a policy problem, and you get to hold the peices.
