cannot change ip address in pool (fixed question)
Sten Carlsen
stenc at s-carlsen.dk
Thu Sep 13 08:50:36 UTC 2012
Looks like the formatting is really confusing here. See below.
On 13/09/12 9:12, Simon Hobson wrote:
>
> This is especially true when we get to your host statements.
>
>
>> #########################################
>> host m69 { hardware ethernet 00:0a:73:f9:e6:3a; fixed-address
>> 172.16.10.69; filename "<http://plik.cm>plik.cm";}
>> class "M069" { match if binary-to-ascii(16, 8, ":", option
>> agent.remote-id) = "0:a:73:f9:e6:3a"; spawn with option
>> agent.remote-id; lease limit 1;}
>> pool { allow members of "M069"; range 172.16.20.69; }
>> ##############################################
>> }
>
> Not only is this hard to read, it's mixing scopes as well.
>
> host m69 {
> hardware ethernet 00:0a:73:f9:e6:3a;
> fixed-address 172.16.10.69;
> filename "plik.cm";}
> class "M069" {
> match if binary-to-ascii(16, 8, ":", option agent.remote-id) =
> "0:a:73:f9:e6:3a";
> spawn with option agent.remote-id; lease limit 1;
> }
> pool {
> allow members of "M069";
> range 172.16.20.69;
> }
> }
>
If I take the original text and reformat it, I get this:
#########################################
host m69 {
hardware ethernet 00:0a:73:f9:e6:3a;
fixed-address 172.16.10.69;
filename "<http://plik.cm>plik.cm";
}
class "M069" {
match if binary-to-ascii(16, 8, ":", option agent.remote-id) =
"0:a:73:f9:e6:3a";
spawn with option agent.remote-id;
lease limit 1;
}
pool {
allow members of "M069";
range 172.16.20.69;
}
##############################################
}
Other than the formatting and the detail that the host and class are
separate, and the remaining "}" is not belonging here, I fully agree
with you Simon.
I want to suggest that proper formatting can make things clear in many
cases showing proper scopes and other details. Maybe a "beautifier"
would be useful?
So what *exactly* are you trying to achieve with this ?
> You've correctly put the host statement in the global scope, but then
> you've defined a class and pool within it.
> I'm not sure about the class (do these need to be in the global scope
> ?), but the pool really belongs within the subnet.
>
> And there should be no need to have both the class/pool AND a fixed
> address - either one or the other. So either :
>
> host m69 {
> hardware ethernet 00:0a:73:f9:e6:3a;
> fixed-address 172.16.10.69;
> filename "plik.cm";}
> }
>
> or :
>
> class "M069" {
> match if option agent.remote-id) = 0:a:73:f9:e6:3a;
> spawn with option agent.remote-id; lease limit 1;
> }
> and
> subnet 172.16.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 {
> next-server 192.168.0.1;
> option domain-name-servers 217.30.129.149, 217.30.137.200;
> option routers 172.16.0.1;
> option subnet-mask 255.255.0.0;
> option broadcast-address 172.16.255.255;
> pool {
> allow members of "M069";
> range 172.16.20.69;
> }
> }
>
> Ahh, now I've split that up, it becomes clearer. 172.16.10.69 is for
> the device with MAC address 00:0a:73:f9:e6:3a and 172.16.20.69 is for
> the downstream device.
> As you've defined it, I don't think the class would be matched because
> the definition (and pool statement) are within a host statement that
> will not apply to the downstream client.
> By definition, the downstream client will not be the host with MAC
> address 0:a:73:f9:e6:3a, so the host statement will not be matches,
> and nothing inside it will be acted upon.
--
Best regards
Sten Carlsen
No improvements come from shouting:
"MALE BOVINE MANURE!!!"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/dhcp-users/attachments/20120913/524b3cc3/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the dhcp-users
mailing list