DHCP code in 2.0.4+
kauer at biplane.com.au
Tue Jun 9 15:20:48 CEST 2009
On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 14:07 +0100, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
> >> See earlier messages in this thread. I (a) found a theoretical issue
> >> with the protocol, and (b) demonstrated it in a live system.
> > I missed it. What was it again?
> When we tried it back in 2007 with an Active/Active configuration, the
> two instances of ISC DHCPD started handing out duplicate leases
> completely arbitrarily. We scrapped the second instance and went
> down to a single one. Haven't tried it again since.
Thanks - but that's not a theoretical problem (necessarily). I'm
interested in the protocol itself; Alan has been talking about an error
in the protocol which would lead to failure *even if the protocol were
What does "Active/Active" mean? Presumably not the same as
"primary/primary", which would be a configuration error...
Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au) +61-2-64957160 (h)
http://www.biplane.com.au/~kauer/ +61-428-957160 (mob)
GPG fingerprint: 07F3 1DF9 9D45 8BCD 7DD5 00CE 4A44 6A03 F43A 7DEF
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the Freeradius-Users