Network in multiple shared-network instances

[Alex Moen]

OK, I am still thinking this through....

So, the customers who have a MAC reservation have statements like so:

host customer1 {
   hardware ethernet 00:11:22:33:44:55;
   fixed-address 10.0.3.2;
   option routers 10.0.3.1;
   option broadcast-address 10.0.3.255;
   option subnet-mask 255.255.255.0;
}

(DNS servers are given out globally.) Is there any reason at all that I need a shared-subnet *at all* in order for customer1 to receive his 10.0.3.2 
address???

Maybe I'm making something harder than it looks?  But what would stop a customer from using that mac address at the wrong physical location?  It has 
to tie back to a subnet statement somewhere, doesn't it?

Thanks,

Alex


Alex Moen wrote:
> Our groups of customers, based on their location on our network, are 
> receiving their addresses via a pool (ok, that's obvious).  We have a 
> situation where we need to share a pool between the groups, but yet keep 
> the original groups as well.  The use of this is to set aside a separate 
> pool for customers using a static address, either given out from the 
> pool using mac reservations or hardcoded into their equipment, rather 
> than pooled addresses that may change over time, and still keep the 
> static addresses in a separate subnet than the regular customer 
> addresses.  The customers on the static subnet are on a different vlan 
> in the access equipment.  Unfortunately, the access equipment management 
> address (which is what is used to request the address, since the 
> equipment is doing dhcprelay) are on different subnets.
> 
> Given the following:
> ---------snip-------------
> shared-network group-1 {
>         subnet 10.6.3.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 { }
>         subnet 10.0.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {
>                 pool {
>                         authoritative;
>                         allow members of "group1-internet";
>                         range 10.0.1.2 10.0.1.200;
>                         min-lease-time 129600;
>                         max-lease-time 259200;
>                         default-lease-time 259200;
>                         option subnet-mask 255.255.255.0;
>                         option broadcast-address 10.0.1.255;
>                         option routers 10.0.1.1;
>                 }
>         }
> }
> 
> 
> shared-network group-2 {
>         subnet 10.6.4.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 { }
>         subnet 10.0.2.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {
>                 pool {
>                         authoritative;
>                         allow members of "group2-internet";
>                         range 10.0.2.2 10.0.2.230;
>                         min-lease-time 129600;
>                         max-lease-time 259200;
>                         default-lease-time 259200;
>                         option subnet-mask 255.255.255.0;
>                         option broadcast-address 10.0.2.255;
>                         option routers 10.0.2.1;
>                 }
>         }
> }
> ------------snip---------------
> 
> 
> Obviously, this does not work:
> 
> ------------snip---------------
> shared-network shared-group-for-static {
>         subnet 10.6.3.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 { }
>         subnet 10.6.4.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 { }
>         subnet 10.0.3.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {
>                 pool {
>                         authoritative;
>                         range 10.0.3.2 10.0.3.98;
>                         min-lease-time 129600;
>                         max-lease-time 259200;
>                         default-lease-time 259200;
>                         option subnet-mask 255.255.255.0;
>                         option broadcast-address 10.0.3.255;
>                         option routers 10.0.3.1;
>                         deny unknown clients;
>                         allow members of "shared-pool-for-static";
>                         allow known clients;
>                 }
>         }
> }
> ------------snip---------------
> 
> It errors on the duplicated subnets, since the subnet is a member of two 
> shared-network statements.
> 
> How is this possible to do, other than combining all of the 
> configurations into one big shared-network statement and making a very 
> difficult config to work with?  Why is it a problem for a subnet to 
> reside in more than one shared-network?
> 
> Thanks for any ideas and advice!!!  I can really use it!
> 
> Alex
> _______________________________________________
> dhcp-users mailing list
> dhcp-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users