I've done more testing and I've found something very interesting. I've
tested logging with our entire string (which will be below) with slight
changes to the 'if' statement solely looking at the 'dhcp-message-type = '
parameter. Of the four message types we routinely see some work and some
Hi all,
I've got an issue with C6's dhcpd custom logging that I cannot figure out.
Hopefully someone has an idea, or has seen a similar issue. We have dhcpd
logging to /var/log/messages a custom header (DHCPUSER:) with MAC, IP and
Circuit-ID.
I'll not bore you with the guts, so here's the
Timothy Murphy gayleard@... writes:
I've installed CentOS-6 on my server
(in parallel to CentOS-5.6)
and now I'm trying to set up dhcpd.
I'm not sure if there has been a change in dhcpd
under CentOS-6, but I'm getting the dreaded message
Not configured to listen on any interfaces!
I've installed CentOS-6 on my server
(in parallel to CentOS-5.6)
and now I'm trying to set up dhcpd.
I'm not sure if there has been a change in dhcpd
under CentOS-6, but I'm getting the dreaded message
Not configured to listen on any interfaces!
when I sudo service dhcpd restart.
I realise now
Timothy Murphy wrote:
I've installed CentOS-6 on my server
(in parallel to CentOS-5.6)
and now I'm trying to set up dhcpd.
I'm not sure if there has been a change in dhcpd
under CentOS-6, but I'm getting the dreaded message
Not configured to listen on any interfaces!
when I sudo service
On 07/15/2011 05:45 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I've installed CentOS-6 on my server
(in parallel to CentOS-5.6)
and now I'm trying to set up dhcpd.
I'm not sure if there has been a change in dhcpd
under CentOS-6, but I'm getting the dreaded message
Not configured to listen on any
Jake Shipton wrote:
On 07/15/2011 05:45 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I've installed CentOS-6 on my server
(in parallel to CentOS-5.6)
and now I'm trying to set up dhcpd.
I'm not sure if there has been a change in dhcpd
under CentOS-6, but I'm getting the dreaded message
Not configured to
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
as a rule, you should declare ALL subnets in simple form:
subnet 192.168.2.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 { }
so ISC DHCP knows about them. Why, I do not know, but it is supposed to
be in newer versions (more strict rules for config file.)
Thanks for your response.
As
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
and there is no mention of interfaces, just their IP's, and you can only
set DHCP service on the first IP on the interface.
What exactly do you mean when you say that you can only set DHCP service
on the first IP on the interface?
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail:
On 07/15/2011 02:06 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Jake Shipton wrote:
On 07/15/2011 05:45 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I've installed CentOS-6 on my server
(in parallel to CentOS-5.6)
and now I'm trying to set up dhcpd.
I'm not sure if there has been a change in dhcpd
under CentOS-6, but I'm
On 7/15/2011 1:54 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
as a rule, you should declare ALL subnets in simple form:
subnet 192.168.2.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 { }
so ISC DHCP knows about them. Why, I do not know, but it is supposed to
be in newer versions (more strict rules for
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
and there is no mention of interfaces, just their IP's, and you can only
set DHCP service on the first IP on the interface.
What exactly do you mean when you say that you can only set DHCP service
on the first IP on the interface?
I
On 7/15/2011 2:56 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
and there is no mention of interfaces, just their IP's, and you can only
set DHCP service on the first IP on the interface.
What exactly do you mean when you say that you can only set DHCP
Les Mikesell wrote:
On 7/15/2011 2:56 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
and there is no mention of interfaces, just their IP's, and you can only
set DHCP service on the first IP on the interface.
What exactly do you mean when you say that you
On 7/15/2011 3:53 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
and there is no mention of interfaces, just their IP's, and you can only
set DHCP service on the first IP on the interface.
What exactly do you mean when you say that you can only set DHCP service
on the first IP on the interface?
I use
Les Mikesell wrote:
But what puzzles me is, what defines the correspondence
between interface and network,
eg in my case eth1 - 192.168.2.0/24
Surely this should be there independently of dhcpd ?
Dhcpd shouldn't care about the name of the interface, but if the request
hasn't been
Steve Clark wrote:
You have to have a subnet declaration(s) that matches an existing
subnet(s) that is configured on the interface(s) you want to provide
dynamic addresses for.
But how exactly is a subnet, in my case 192.168.2.0, configured
on the interface eth1 ?
--
Timothy Murphy
On Jul 15, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
But what puzzles me is, what defines the correspondence
between interface and network,
eg in my case eth1 - 192.168.2.0/24
Surely this should be there independently of dhcpd ?
Dhcpd shouldn't care about the name
18 matches
Mail list logo
