Re: Choosing length of lease

"Michael J. Lewis" <hosmjl@chevron.com> Tue, 12 November 1996 04:10 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id ae07398; 11 Nov 96 23:10 EST
Received: from marge.bucknell.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa20056; 11 Nov 96 19:59 EST
Received: from reef.bucknell.edu by mail.bucknell.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/17Jul96-0109PM) id AA27153; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 19:49:32 -0500
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 19:49:32 -0500
Message-Id: <3287B707.531A@chevron.com>
Errors-To: droms@bucknell.edu
Reply-To: dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu
Originator: dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu
Sender: dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: "Michael J. Lewis" <hosmjl@chevron.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu>
Subject: Re: Choosing length of lease
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Discussion of DHCP for IPv4
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

A very unscientific study of traffic at my installation showed that DHCP
took .05% maximum of LAN traffic.  (This occurred Monday morning during
the after weekend reboot cycle.)  Two DHCP servers were in use at the 
time one with a seven day lease and the other a 30 day lease.  Normal
DHCP traffic ranged from .01% to 0%.  (FYI, I do mean .01% not one 
per cent.)  


Mark Sirota wrote:
> 
> John M. Wobus wrote:
> > (1) At your own site, how long do you make leases and why did you
> >     choose this time?
> 
> Initially, our leases in the residential dorms were made one year long.
> That way, students were guaranteed to have the same address all year,
> which is very important to them.  Furthermore,  those few who stay
> in the dorms year-round get the same address indefinitely.
> 
> We have since reduced it to four months, long enough to cover the
> summer.  If a student renews near the end of the academic year, and
> gets back early, and lives in the same dorm, they'll get the same
> address the following year, but we will survive the big September
> crunch.
> 
> In non-Resnet networks, we generally do one-day leases, with a maximum
> of one week.
> 
> > (2) Are there lease-lengths that you would consider to be a
> >     lower-bound or upper-bound for any ALL practical uses?  If so,
> >     what would you be trying to avoid by staying above/below this
> >     bound.
> 
> One concern I have about the very short lease times that some people
> have reported is, what about load on the server and the network
> to which the server is connected?  In a large installation, with
> thousands of addresses being served by a single central server, this
> seems like it could be a consideration.
> 
> On the flip side, it looks like just about everything communicates with
> the server when it boots, even if the lease is fresh, so maybe short
> leases (as long as they are one day or more) don't introduce that much
> extra traffic.
> --
> Mark Sirota, Network Systems Engineer
> University of Pennsylvania, Information Systems and Computing
> msirota@isc.upenn.edu, 215/573-7214