3.0.5 and dhcp inform support

[Paine, Thomas Asa]

Gene,
        I apologize.  For some reason my first attempt to post on this issue, back in January and the one you replied to, was sitting in a mail queue here and didn't go out until this morning, or went out again, I'm not sure.

I defer you to these messages...
   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=dhcp-users&m=116957053915772&w=2

   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=dhcp-users&m=116957226007034&w=2

Again, I apologize for the double post.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   Thomas Paine {paineta at uwec.edu)}
   University of Wisconsin - Eau Claire
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


-----Original Message-----
From: Gene Rackow [mailto:rackow at mcs.anl.gov]
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 9:36 AM
To: Paine, Thomas Asa
Cc: rackow at mcs.anl.gov
Subject: Re: 3.0.5 and dhcp inform support

"Paine, Thomas Asa" made the following keystrokes:
 >
>         I recently upgraded our service to 3.0.5, however, it has
>introduced some issues.  I currently have two scopes in a
>shared-network configurations.  One scope services "known"
>clients, while other scope services "unknown" clients.  Each scope has
>different DNS server options.  All is well, until DHCPINFORMs are
>relayed to the server.  At which time, the server is sending DHCPACKs
>back to the clients and screwing up DNS settings.  I'm not overly
>concerned about providing inform support at this time, is there an easy
>way to disable it in the dhcpd.conf file?

I just started to track down a similar problem.

Do you have a default domain-name-server set prior to your scopes?
Something along the lines of:
   option domain-name-servers server1, server2;
   shared-network "somenet" {
     subnet 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {
           pool {
                allow known-clients;
                range 192.168.1.60 192.168.1.99;
                option domain-name-servers server3, server4;
                #.... clip ...
                }
           pool {
                deny unknown-clients;
                range 192.168.1.200 192.168.1.220;
                #.... clip...
                #  Note lack of domain-name-server entry here.
                }
       }
   }


Something was causing machines in the known-clients pool to be getting dns server1 and 2 when doing an inform.
It seemed to make things better when I moved that top dns entry into the pool for unknown clients and no longer specify the "default".

I'm not sure if that really fixed things or is just masking the problem somehow.  It did make things better, at least at first glance..

Let me know if you hear anything on this.  I'd like to fix it as well.

-_Gene