Network Address getting assigned to client and ping not working (ver 4.2.2)
Jim Glassford
jmglass at iup.edu
Tue Apr 24 14:43:42 UTC 2012
Hi,
The .0 and .255 are valid IP addresses within the network but ~some~
clients do have problems with these IP addresses. To avoid any chance of
this, I do exclude the .0 and .255 addresses just to save any problems.
Might be better ways but seems to work well here, sample for one below.
subnet 7.7.123.0 netmask 255.255.248.0 {
option routers 7.7.123.4;
deny bootp;
pool {
range 7.7.123.22 7.7.123.254; range 7.7.124.1 7.7.124.254;
range 7.7.125.1 7.7.125.254; range 7.7.126.1 7.7.126.254;
range 7.7.127.1 7.7.127.254; range 7.7.128.1 7.7.128.254;
range 7.7.129.1 7.7.129.254; range 7.7.130.1 7.7.130.254;
default-lease-time 3600; max-lease-time 3600;
ignore client-updates;
ddns-updates on;
ddns-rev-domainname "in-addr.arpa.";
ddns-hostname = binary-to-ascii (16, 8, "-",substring (hardware,
1, 6));
ddns-domainname "x.y.z";
deny members of "badboys";
}
}
On 4/24/2012 10:31 AM, Mukund Deshpande wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Thanks for clarifying my doubt.
>
> I have one query here.
>
> If my subnet is say 7.7.0.0/16 <http://7.7.0.0/16>
>
> and in range if i specify
>
> range 7.7.0.1 7.7.77.77;
>
>
> Then 7.7.1.0 , 7.7.2.0 , 7.7.3.0 7.7.77.0 or 7.7.5.255 are part of this
> range. Will have to explicitly exclude all the addresses from this range
> ? That would be so many addresses to exclude.
>
> And if we were to exclude the .0 's and .255's it would be many ranges
> we would end up specifying.
>
> Please correct me if I am wrong.
>
> Regards,
> Mukund
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Flex Banana <flex.banana at bluewin.ch
> <mailto:flex.banana at bluewin.ch>> wrote:
>
> I think you can not use .0 as host address.
>
> We have a lot of /23 subnet and never a .0 will be assigned.
>
> Best regards
> Banana
>
> On Apr 24, 2012, at 3:59 PM, Peter Rathlev wrote:
>
>> If you want to use 7.7.7.0 as a host address (on ethernet) you need to
>> use 7.7.6.0/23 <http://7.7.6.0/23> or larger where it would be valid.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcp-users mailing list
> dhcp-users at lists.isc.org <mailto:dhcp-users at lists.isc.org>
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mukund
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcp-users mailing list
> dhcp-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
More information about the dhcp-users
mailing list