if the preferred dns is through the company vpn then the dual relay might
be the ideal, short <5 minute leases, the primary (AD DHCP) hand out ip and
AD DNS with the local failover handing out local DNS. but I dont know when
you put in a second target in the relay if it is a round robin or ordered
list

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Josh Luthman <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Just monitor an IP through the VPN?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Nov 22, 2015 9:01 PM, "Tyler Treat" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> I think it's somewhere between what you wrote, and they don't trust the
>> crappy temp cable connection over there at the site.
>> They say what if the VPN goes down - users won't be able to get ips if a
>> machine reboots!
>> I say, what the hell are they going to be doing anyways if the VPN goes
>> down?
>> [ Drops mic, stomps off. ]
>> ___________________________
>> Mangled by my iPhone.
>> ___________________________
>> Tyler Treat
>> ___________________________
>>
>>
>> On Nov 22, 2015, at 7:37 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I think your admins dont understand what dhcp relay is, im guessing they
>> thing the relay is a weird way of saying its a l2 tunnel for dhcp or some
>> dumb shit. other than the loss of dhcp when the vpn is down, relay would be
>> the preferred way to do it. I dont know how mikrotik works with secondary
>> relays, but you could configure the primary to point to the AD DHCP server,
>> and the second being on a virtual interface of the mikrotik, since its just
>> relaying to itself.
>> Go online and find a 6 pack of Jolt Cola, give that to the sysadmin, he
>> will let you do what you want.
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Tyler Treat <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Indeed, this is a corporate setup with Windows DHCP at the core.
>>> This is a site on the remote end of a VPN.
>>> The sysadmins were a bit on edge about sending DHCP across the VPN, so
>>> they asked that we stick it local on the remote site Mikrotik
>>> router....which works ok, though we hit a bit of a snag with the NAC, which
>>> likes to sniff DHCP traffic to help detect and identify devices on the
>>> segment, in addition to several other data sources.
>>>
>>> I may just nag the sysadmins to build this out in the core DHCP and this
>>> will solve itself.
>>> Just point DHCP Relay at both addresses and I think we'll be fine.
>>>
>>> ___________________________
>>> Mangled by my iPhone.
>>> ___________________________
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Nov 22, 2015, at 5:13 PM, Paul Stewart <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Have never seen that work on any platforms I work with ...
>>> Cisco/Juniper
>>> > etc...
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of George Skorup
>>> > Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2015 1:40 PM
>>> > To: [email protected]
>>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DHCP relay question
>>> >
>>> > MikroTik? So you're asking for an /ip dhcp-server and an /ip
>>> dhcp-relay on
>>> > the same interface? No idea if that will work, never tried it. You can
>>> > certainly have multiple DHCP servers on the same broadcast domain.
>>> > Never had to do that outside of a large corporate environment for
>>> redundancy
>>> > though, and that was just windows DHCP servers.
>>> >
>>> >> On 11/22/2015 11:38 AM, Tyler Treat wrote:
>>> >> Have a question regarding dhcp relay function.
>>> >> Say we have local dhcp configured at a remote site, yet we have a
>>> network
>>> > management tool that would like to see dhcp traffic for device
>>> detection
>>> > purposes.
>>> >> My question is this:   Is it possible for local dhcp to function, and
>>> have
>>> > dhcp relay pointing to our NAC to assist it in detecting devices?(the
>>> NAC
>>> > doesn't respond, just listens)
>>> >>
>>> >> Thoughts?
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks
>>> >> Tyler
>>> >> ___________________________
>>> >> Mangled by my iPhone.
>>> >> ___________________________
>>> >>
>>> >> Tyler Treat
>>> >> Corn Belt Technologies, Inc.
>>> >>
>>> >> [email protected]
>>> >> ___________________________
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team
>> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
>>
>>


-- 
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as
part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.

Reply via email to