Right @ 100 servers. Haven't been burned, but I'm not thrilled about lack of true failover/redundancy in DHCP in W2k3. 80/20 doesn't cut it, IMHO. On Jan 18, 2011 2:34 PM, "David Lum" <[email protected]> wrote: > +1. For same reasons. > > Jonathan I'm guessing you've been burned by DHCP issues in the past, or have few enough servers it's not too inconvenient? > > Dave > > From: Erik Goldoff [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 11:16 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: DHCP reservations explained... > > I've always liked DHCP reservations over static IP addresses for servers where possible for ease of management > Single view of most servers from DHCP client list > simple to change parameters globally ( default gateway, primary DNS, secondary DNS, etc ) without having to visit each server > less likely to experience IP in use conflict from out of date tracking spreadsheets when adding new devices to the network > etc, etc, etc > but if your clients/applications use hostnames, then that's what I'd monitor for most checks, keeping a single/simple check using the IP address to cross verify against name resolution. > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 2:06 PM, David Lum <[email protected]<mailto: [email protected]>> wrote: > The other day someone commented that it seemed like a bit much that 50% of my 100-ish servers have DHCP reservations - driving home yesterday I realized another reason why I have it that way (because yes, I chew on these questions and constantly evaluate why I do some process or another) - because my fellow SE's have their server monitoring set up to look at specific IP's instead of hostnames and I am unable to convince them otherwise. If the server IP changes it hoses their tests and the dependencies. > > It's not how I set *MY* monitoring up for servers I maintain, but I have posted that question here in fact and have seen differing opinions on weather hostname or IP is preferred. > David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER > NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION > (Desk) 503.548.5229 // (Cell) 503.267.9764 > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to [email protected]<mailto: [email protected]> > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to [email protected]<mailto: [email protected]> > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to [email protected] > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to [email protected] with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
