Re: DHCP and secondaries

["Michael J. Lewis" <[e-mail]>]

In our case, we are using the secondary subnets to provide additional 
address space temporarily while budgets are proposed to buy additional 
hardware or permanently to avoid the hardware upgrade costs.  At my 
location, the secondary was create to facilitate DHCP implementation as 
the original subnet was/is quite full of UNIX, mainframe, PC and other 
static addresses.  We are currently using DHCP only on the secondary 
subnet.

At other locations, the secondaries were added to provide cover 
unexpected growth of TCP/IP use among PCs.  This is the situation at our 
downtown Houston offices where both the primary and secondary will be 
serviced by DHCP.

Mike Carney - Sun BOS Software wrote:
> 
> > I would settle for random.  Right now, I have a need for
> > coverage (quantity) in excess of what I can currently
> > deliver.
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Does anyone know of a pointer to a DHCP package that
> > > > supports the use of secondary addresses (i.e, multiple
> > > > logical subnets on one interface)?
> > >
> > > Do you want to be able to allocate addresses to any of the subnets,
> >  or
> > > just to the new one that you're migrating to?  If the former, how
> > > should the server choose which net a given host should wind up on, or
> > > should it just choose one at random?  I'm planning to implement
> > > something like this for ISC DHCPD, but I'm not sure if it'll be in
> > > this week's release (I suspect not, at this point).  If the latter,
> > > ISC DHCPD can be made to do what you want with minimal changes.
> > >
> > >                            _MelloN_
> > >
> >
> >
> 
> I'm curious - Are you subnetting Class B networks to class C, and find that
> 254 addresses is not enough for one media segment, or do you have a number
> of Class C addresses, and must use multiple logical networks on the same
> media the service the number of hosts you've got out there?
> 
> Thanks,
> Mike Carney
> SunSoft PC Networking
> Chelmsford, MA