Static IP via Option 82 - methodology
perl-list
perl-list at network1.net
Thu Jan 9 14:42:03 UTC 2014
Is this the way to do it?
------------------------
host 10-24-24-9 { option agent.circuit-id = "1.21.1.4/Ethernet9"; fixed-address 10.24.24.9; } # static by option 82 (with host line)?
------------------------
It seems to pass syntax tests and the DHCP server will run. Will it actually match and assign the address though?
Wanted to check thoughts here before I deploy this on a running system (which is the only place we can test that actually has option 82 available).
----- Original Message -----
> From: "perl-list" <perl-list at network1.net>
> To: "Users of ISC DHCP" <dhcp-users at lists.isc.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2014 12:30:43 PM
> Subject: Static IP via Option 82 - methodology
> Folks,
> We have a scenario where we need to provide a static IP address to equipment
> based on the circuit-id portion of Option 82. We do this in the following
> example snippet (IPs and info changed to protect the innocent):
> ------------------------
> class "1-2-3-9" {
> match if option agent.circuit-id = "1.21.1.4/Ethernet9";
> }
> shared-network EXAMPLE_YADA {
> subnet 1.2.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 {
> option routers 1.2.255.254;
> option subnet-mask 255.255.0.0;
> pool {
> min-lease-time 172800;
> default-lease-time 172800;
> max-lease-time 172800;
> server-name "1.1.0.12";
> filename "SOME_FILE";
> deny dynamic bootp clients;
> allow members of "1-2-3-9";
> range 1.2.3.9;
> }
> }
> }
> ------------------------
> This is mainly done this way so that the equipment at the end of the circuit
> can be hot-swapped by low tech field personnel without the need for high
> tech personnel at the office to alter the DHCP configuration as there would
> be if the MAC address was the matching key.
> The problem we have run into is that when swapping the equipment, if the
> lease is still active (ie: the equipment is not completely broken and has
> updated its lease recently), then we have to wait until the lease expires
> before the new equipment will obtain its IP (1.2.3.9 in the example above).
> We could simply set the lease to a shorter length, but that wouldn't
> completely erase the problem and we would still have some length of time
> where the IP would be unobtainable. A better solution would be more like the
> host statement method like:
> ------------------------
> host 1-2-3-9 { hardware ethernet 01:03:05:07:09:aa; fixed-address 1.2.3.9; }
> ------------------------
> which does not have a lease associated with it and so would happily hand the
> IP to the new equipment. However, we need to do this with option 82. Is that
> possible in a host statement? If so, I've not heard that it is.
> Does anyone know of a possible solution to this problem (coaxing the DHCP
> server to not store a lease for the option 82 match assigned address)?
> _______________________________________________
> dhcp-users mailing list
> dhcp-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/dhcp-users/attachments/20140109/99dd56e9/attachment.html>
More information about the dhcp-users
mailing list