Prev: Desktop appearance with a Remote Desktop Connection to W2003
Next: permissions on a share
From: kj [SBS MVP] on 12 May 2010 12:51
yaro137 wrote:
> On 12 May, 16:18, "kj [SBS MVP]" <KevinJ....(a)SPAMFREE.gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> yaro137 wrote:
>>> On 12 May, 14:58, "Phillip Windell" <philwind...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> No.
>>>> You just create the reservation in the normal manual way.
>>
>>>> --
>>>> Phillip Windell
>>
>>>> The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or
>>>> Microsoft, or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
>>>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>
>>>> "yaro137" <yaro...(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message
>>
>>>> news:30bdb280-27d2-4039-8d2d-a0eb4ddcc64f(a)k29g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>>> Is there a way to easily make a reservation from a leased IP
>>>>> address? The MAC address is already there so I would thing it
>>>>> would be sensible to have the option to just right-click on a
>>>>> particular lease and choose reserve or something. Maybe I'm
>>>>> missing something and the option exists somewhere else. If so can
>>>>> someone point me in the right direction? Cheers
>>>>> yaro
>>
>>> That's not very practical then is it? Is there any reason you can
>>> think of why it can't be done in a simpler way?
>>> yaro
>>
>> I always thought that would be a nice feature to have. Like a little
>> "right click", "make reservation from this lease".
>>
>> Next best thing might be written up on this blog post though.
>> Suggest having a look,
>>
>> http://blogs.technet.com/teamdhcp/archive/2006/09/19/457383.aspx
>>
>> --
>> /kj
>
> It's all right if you have a large network with many reservations to
> be done. However, it's too much hassle if you have big number of
> unrelated networks with just a few devices that need reservation.
> yaro

Beats entering them by hand, but still a nice suggestion for the next OS
version.
--
/kj


From: Phillip Windell on 13 May 2010 09:56

"yaro137" <yaro137(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:772a6f66-fdc8-493b-a077-ab16de65d159(a)h9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...

> That's not very practical then is it? Is there any reason you can
> think of why it can't be done in a simpler way?

I don't consider Reservations practical in the first place. I nearly 12
years of doing this job I think I have *two* in one subnet,...the other
subnets have none.

If something needs the same IP all the time I statically configure
it,...it's done,...I walk awary from it. I don't have to worry about a DHCP
failure leaving the machine with the wrong address or no address at
all,...instead it will *always* work.



--
Phillip Windell

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------


From: Dave Warren on 13 May 2010 21:32
In message <eeIwyQq8KHA.4648(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> "Phillip Windell"
<philwindell(a)hotmail.com> was claimed to have wrote:

>
>"yaro137" <yaro137(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message
>news:772a6f66-fdc8-493b-a077-ab16de65d159(a)h9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
>> That's not very practical then is it? Is there any reason you can
>> think of why it can't be done in a simpler way?
>
>I don't consider Reservations practical in the first place. I nearly 12
>years of doing this job I think I have *two* in one subnet,...the other
>subnets have none.
>
>If something needs the same IP all the time I statically configure
>it,...it's done,...I walk awary from it. I don't have to worry about a DHCP
>failure leaving the machine with the wrong address or no address at
>all,...instead it will *always* work.

For degrees of always that assume nothing else in your network changes.
I enjoy the freedom to change default gateways, DNS servers, NetBIOS
node types, WINS servers, etc centrally rather than having to touch
every server.

I have absolutely every device that needs a static IP assigned as a DHCP
reservation, with a bare minimum also set up as static IPs on the
machine itself just to reduce administration headaches. This mainly
applies to routers, switches and DCs (in other words, the absolutely
mission critical stuff)

The other thing I've found is that even if you plan on hardcoding IPs,
it's still nice to have a DHCP reservations set up so that when a box
gets an OS reinstall or it gets fatfingered to DHCP, it comes up with
the correct IP before any manual configuration is done and doesn't go
off and register a wrong IP in DNS.

Really though I don't think there is a right or wrong answer, it's just
a question of your preferences and your tolerance for different
situations. There are definite advantages and disadvantages to both
choices.

I've renumbered critical servers far more than I've had DHCP outages, so
that flavours my view point -- When I bring a new server up to "replace"
an old server I don't tend to re-use names or IPs numbers, so this
creates more IP volatility than you might find elsewhere.

If your network rarely (if ever) moves services to new IPs, or if you
have trouble keeping your DHCP server up, going for static IPs is
absolutely the way to go.
From: Bill Kearney on 16 May 2010 00:43
> If something needs the same IP all the time I statically configure
> it,...it's done,...I walk awary from it. I don't have to worry about a
> DHCP failure leaving the machine with the wrong address or no address at
> all,...instead it will *always* work.

Consider a large network with a lot of desktop machines. Having the
machines get a stable IP address helps for things like tracking usage (and
abuse) through collected logs. Setting up the machines with leases means
should you need to actually change any of the other DHCP controlled values
(gateways, DNS servers, timezone, etc) you won't have to go touch all the
machines manually (or deal with remotely changing it).

DHCP reservations serve useful purposes, just ones beyond your needs.

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Desktop appearance with a Remote Desktop Connection to W2003
Next: permissions on a share