While I don't know all of your circumstances, it seems to me that instead of trying to do funky things with DHCP, you'd be better off re-architecting your network. Having two different exits from your network segment seems a bit inefficient or confusing.
I understand that this might not be under your control, but that's the thought that comes to mind. Kurt On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 21:53, HELP_PC <[email protected]> wrote: > I need some addresses for Cisco phones , but the default gateway should be a > corporate router and not the local DSL router > > GuidoElia > HELPPC > > ________________________________ > Da: Brian Desmond [mailto:[email protected]] > Inviato: sabato 24 ottobre 2009 6.49 > A: NT System Admin Issues > Oggetto: RE: New DHCP scope > > I am not sure offhand, but, I would look at the SuperScope feature as I > believe it’s more inline with what I suspect you’re trying to do. > > > > Thanks, > > Brian Desmond > > [email protected] > > > > c - 312.731.3132 > > > > From: HELP_PC [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 11:47 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: New DHCP scope > > > > > > Is it possible to create a new DHCP scope using a range of excluded > addresses of the first scope ? > > I.e. if I escluded a range 10.124.116.100 to 110 from the actual scope , > could this range be the range for the new scope (with other scope options)? > > TIA > > GuidoElia > HELPPC > > > > > > > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
