Hello Jes�s -
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Jes�s M D�az wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> when it is defined a pool, and it is used a 'subnetmask' different
> than '255.255.255.255', i think the ip addresses should not be
> assigned one by one, but 'n' by 'n', where 'n' was the number of ip
> addresses indicated by 'subnetmask'.
>
> an example:
>
> <AddressPool pool1>
> Range 192.168.7.1 192.168.7.128
> Subnetmask 255.255.255.248
> </AddressPool>
>
> first user should get 192.168.7.1/29, second 192.168.7.9/29, and so
> on.
>
> currently, first user get 192.168.7.1/29, but second one get
> 192.168.7.2/29, so, there are two networks overlapped.
>
> there is a solution for that? do you have understanded my question?
>
Yes I understand your question, but keep in mind that the AddressAllocator
functionality is designed for host addressing, and the subnet mask is a
description of the IP topology of the host connection, not the indication of
the size of the IP address allocation.
If you want to allocate subnets, you will have to send Framed-IP-Address and
Framed-IP-Subnet specifications appropriate for the router at the far end of
the link that is asking for IP address information. You will also have to set
up the appropriate routing information and make sure that the hosts on the
remote LAN segment also get their addresses allocated correctly.
Remember - DHCP = dynamic *host* configuration protocol, which is what the
AddressAllocator SQL (and DHCP) are designed for.
regards
Hugh
--
Radiator: the most portable, flexible and configurable RADIUS server
anywhere. Available on *NIX, *BSD, Windows 95/98/2000, NT, MacOS X.
-
Nets: internetwork inventory and management - graphical, extensible,
flexible with hardware, software, platform and database independence.
===
Archive at http://www.starport.net/~radiator/
Announcements on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, email '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' with
'unsubscribe radiator' in the body of the message.
