dhcp cluster fails to issue static lease when partner down for too long

[Christ Schlacta]

I think they're both set up to be equals..  I'm not sure.
On 9/23/2012 9:42 AM, Randall C Grimshaw wrote:
> I am curious if this is similar to a bug I observed recently related the the surviving peer being the secondary? was yours the secondary?
>
> Randall Grimshaw rgrimsha at syr.edu
> ________________________________________
> From: dhcp-users-bounces+rgrimsha=syr.edu at lists.isc.org [dhcp-users-bounces+rgrimsha=syr.edu at lists.isc.org] on behalf of Christ Schlacta [lists at aarcane.org]
> Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 2:10 AM
> To: Users of ISC DHCP
> Subject: dhcp cluster fails to issue static lease when partner down for too     long
>
> so I've got a bunch of static leases configured in my config files, and
> a pair of systems configured as a small cluster.  Well, when one system
> was down (we left on vacation, wanted to save some resources) for about
> 3 days, the static leases would no longer issue when we returned.  In
> the logs was a message similar to "Peer holds all the leases", or
> something like that.  I don't have the logs handy.
> I believe this is a pretty serious BUG.  dhcpd should NEVER refuse or
> fail to issue a deterministic lease, one that's either statically
> defined, or defined in terms of a dns entry, or similarly
> deterministically defined.
> _______________________________________________
> dhcp-users mailing list
> dhcp-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
> _______________________________________________
> dhcp-users mailing list
> dhcp-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users