MAC address change

[Simon Hobson]

Sten Carlsen wrote:

>>>>host customer101public {
>>>>   hardware ethernet 00:11:22:33:44:55;
>>>>   fixed-address 1.1.1.2;
>>>>}
>>>>
>>>>shared-network vlan101 {
>>>>   subnet 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.248 {
>>>>     option routers 10.0.0.1;
>>>>     pool {
>>>>       range 10.0.0.2 10.0.0.6;
>>>>       deny known-clients;
>>>>     }
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>>>   subnet 1.1.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.252 {
>>>>     option routers 1.1.1.1;
>>>>   }
>>>>}

>>>You still have the mistake to have a fixed address in a range. 
>>>Declare subnet 1.1.1.0 with no range statement. There is a risk 
>>>that an unknown client will be given the 1.1.1.2 address when it 
>>>is defined as a range.

>>Err, no he hasn't. The range is in a different (RFC1918) subnet).

>fixed-address 1.1.1.2;
>subnet 1.1.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.252 {
>     option routers 1.1.1.1;
>   }
>
>As far as I can see that fixed address IS contained in the subnet? 
>and the subnet is part of the shared network?

That is correct - the fixed address *MUST* be within a defined subnet 
(or it won't be usable), but it must *NOT* be within a dynamic range. 
The only range statement is for the 10.0.0.0/29 subnet, the fixed 
address is within the 1.1.1.0/30 subnet, no problem.

The issue is when you combine :
    fixed-address 1.1.1.2;
with :
    range 1.1.1.2;

In this case (as was in the original config), one device can be 
leased the address via the host/fixed-address statement, another 
device can be leased it via the dynamic allocation route - thus a 
conflict. That is no longer the case.

-- 
Simon Hobson

Visit http://www.magpiesnestpublishing.co.uk/ for books by acclaimed
author Gladys Hobson. Novels - poetry - short stories - ideal as
Christmas stocking fillers. Some available as e-books.