Send dhcp-users mailing list submissions to
dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
dhcp-users-requ...@lists.isc.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
dhcp-users-ow...@lists.isc.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of dhcp-users digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Failover host stops releasing IP's if the peer is down.
(Simon Hobson)
2. Re: Failover host stops releasing IP's if the peer is down.
(p0wn3rs)
3. Re: Failover host stops releasing IP's if the peer is down.
(Niall O'Reilly)
4. Re: test (ivan nepryakhin)
5. Re: Failover host stops releasing IP's if the peer is down.
(Simon Hobson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2019 13:04:22 +0000
From: Simon Hobson <dh...@thehobsons.co.uk>
To: dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Failover host stops releasing IP's if the peer is down.
Message-ID: <fae5f8e5-0ab4-44ce-961e-e357cbb06...@thehobsons.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
p0wn3rs <p0wn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hello,
>
>we have different DHCP clusters and sometimes happens for a system to
>be
>down for a long time (the location doesn't grant us immediate physical
>access and the hw doesn't support WOL).
>Whenever this happens the main host stops releasing IP's...
>
>Dec? 9 10:39:36 fw-01 dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:a0:ba:0f:d6:ff via
>br1: not responding (recovering)
>Dec? 9 10:39:37 fw-01 dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:a0:ba:0f:d7:29 via
>br1: not responding (recovering)
I think you have your terminology wrong. It is not offering a lease, "release"
in DHCP terminology has a very different meaning.
What happens if you put the surviving server into partner-down state ? It
should then take over the whole pool and act like a single server. When the
peer comes back up, they should automatically recover.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2019 14:39:55 +0100
From: p0wn3rs <p0wn...@gmail.com>
To: dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Failover host stops releasing IP's if the peer is down.
Message-ID: <c530fa7c-de25-5344-67ec-6d5061399...@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Hello,
yes, now it's getting the IP's.
Is there a way to "timeout" the surviving server and set it on
partner-down automatically?
thanks.
On 12/9/19 2:04 PM, Simon Hobson wrote:
> p0wn3rs <p0wn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> we have different DHCP clusters and sometimes happens for a system to
>> be
>> down for a long time (the location doesn't grant us immediate physical
>> access and the hw doesn't support WOL).
>> Whenever this happens the main host stops releasing IP's...
>>
>> Dec? 9 10:39:36 fw-01 dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:a0:ba:0f:d6:ff via
>> br1: not responding (recovering)
>> Dec? 9 10:39:37 fw-01 dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:a0:ba:0f:d7:29 via
>> br1: not responding (recovering)
> I think you have your terminology wrong. It is not offering a lease,
> "release" in DHCP terminology has a very different meaning.
>
> What happens if you put the surviving server into partner-down state ? It
> should then take over the whole pool and act like a single server. When the
> peer comes back up, they should automatically recover.
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcp-users mailing list
> dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2019 14:39:54 +0000
From: "Niall O'Reilly" <niall.orei...@ucd.ie>
To: "Users of ISC DHCP" <dhcp-users@lists.isc.org>
Subject: Re: Failover host stops releasing IP's if the peer is down.
Message-ID: <806b887c-862a-4d86-9f88-c8b0f451b...@ucd.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; markup=markdown
On 9 Dec 2019, at 13:39, p0wn3rs wrote:
> Is there a way to "timeout" the surviving server and set it on
> partner-down automatically?
Sure. See https://kb.isc.org/docs/isc-dhcp-44-manual-pages-dhcpdconf (or
the
corresponding documentation for the version of interest to you) and in
particular
the warning, "Think very carefully before enabling this feature."
Niall O'Reilly
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2019 20:45:32 +0300
From: ivan nepryakhin <nepryakhin.1...@gmail.com>
To: Users of ISC DHCP <dhcp-users@lists.isc.org>
Subject: Re: test
Message-ID:
<CAK=DxUzUqqPM__hpZxNgLHjfU4FJ2avwNqSKOO1f8dLBt=z...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
got it
On Sun, 8 Dec 2019 at 23:50, spammailbox <s...@umutkuepeli.eu> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> dhcp-users mailing list
> dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/dhcp-users/attachments/20191209/373cf3e9/attachment-0001.htm>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2019 19:26:13 +0000
From: Simon Hobson <dh...@thehobsons.co.uk>
To: Users of ISC DHCP <dhcp-users@lists.isc.org>
Subject: Re: Failover host stops releasing IP's if the peer is down.
Message-ID: <95e85fee-eba9-433a-946d-75b08bf3e...@thehobsons.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Niall O'Reilly <niall.orei...@ucd.ie> wrote:
>
> Sure. See https://kb.isc.org/docs/isc-dhcp-44-manual-pages-dhcpdconf (or the
> corresponding documentation for the version of interest to you) and in
> particular
> the warning, "Think very carefully before enabling this feature."
Specifically, the section on "The auto-partner-down statement".
Just to expand in case the OP doesn't get it - IMO the warning might not be
recognised by some users. There is no guarantee that a loss of communications
between peers means that one of them can no longer serve clients. Having two
isolated servers handling the same address range is highly liable to create
some very "interesting" problems as they start to hand out the same addresses
to different clients and other such bad behaviour. This is why this option is
turned off by default and did not exist until fairly recently.
Turn it on if you wish, but be prepared for weird behaviour under some fault
conditions. Personally I don't think this is a sane option to turn on unless
both servers are co-located and both connected to ports on the same switch.
An alternative is to simply put monitoring in place (there are many tools to do
this) and alert your duty admins should a server go offline or a server go into
comms interrupted state. They can then apply some sanity checks and manually
put the active server into partner-down state.
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
dhcp-users mailing list
dhcp-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
------------------------------
End of dhcp-users Digest, Vol 134, Issue 3
******************************************
