DHCP code in 2.0.4+

[Alan DeKok]

Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
> Alan; I'd be interested in hearing what the 'corner cases' are where
> fail-over is advantageous.

  When you're too lazy to write your own solution, *or* where you've
never run into problems with the protocol.

> It depends how seamless you want to make the fail-over process. You
> don't have to run truly clustered SQL, you can get away with a Master->
> Slaves type arrangement. With MySQL at least, it's possible to nominate
> one of the replicas as a new master should the current master fail; this
> process can be automated to a large degree. Fail-back is much harder
> (apparently), and would be difficult to automate.

  Having active/active servers assign leases "live" from the same pool
would be nice, too.  That's only slightly harder to do.

  Alan DeKok.