Multiple DHCP Servers in One Domain

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory (More info?)

Respected
Is it possible to have multiple DHCP servers in one
Domain or WorkGroup?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory (More info?)

Yes, there is nothing to stop you using multiple DHCP servers in one
workgroup or domain (other than authorisation). There are, however, some
considerations.

DHCP works on broadcast traffic; you should only really use multiple DHCP
servers on the same subnet with a supernet. Or simply following the 80/ 20
guidelines.

A supernet and the 80/ 20 split require all scopes defined, but the opposite
scopes must be disabled. For example, with a C-class net such as
192.168.100.0/24 you could implement something along the lines of:

Server-A - 192.168.100.1 - 192.168.100.250
[Exclude - 192.168.100.201 - 192.168.100.250]

Server-B - 192.168.100.1 - 192.168.100.250
[Exclude - 192.168.100.1 - 192.168.100.200]

--
Paul Williams

http://www.msresource.net/
http://forums.msresource.net/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory (More info?)

Thanx for urgent response.But another query is that how client will judge
that it has to take ip from which DHCP Server If two DHCP servers are running
?simulataneously.

Thanx in Advance.

"ptwilliams" wrote:

> Yes, there is nothing to stop you using multiple DHCP servers in one
> workgroup or domain (other than authorisation). There are, however, some
> considerations.
>
> DHCP works on broadcast traffic; you should only really use multiple DHCP
> servers on the same subnet with a supernet. Or simply following the 80/ 20
> guidelines.
>
> A supernet and the 80/ 20 split require all scopes defined, but the opposite
> scopes must be disabled. For example, with a C-class net such as
> 192.168.100.0/24 you could implement something along the lines of:
>
> Server-A - 192.168.100.1 - 192.168.100.250
> [Exclude - 192.168.100.201 - 192.168.100.250]
>
> Server-B - 192.168.100.1 - 192.168.100.250
> [Exclude - 192.168.100.1 - 192.168.100.200]
>
> --
> Paul Williams
>
> http://www.msresource.net/
> http://forums.msresource.net/
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory (More info?)

That's the point --it can't. On a restart or lease renewal it will state in
the packet the original DHCP server (that is, this will kind of be directed
at that box). However otherwise it will be random --based on which box
answers first.

--
Paul Williams

http://www.msresource.net/
http://forums.msresource.net/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory (More info?)

Then how it is true that we can implement two DHCP Servers in a single Domain?
Secondly if we implemnet a DHCP Server in a Domian and other in Workgroup
then what will be the response of Computers to get IP from Domain or
Standalone DHCP Server.
Thanx.

"ptwilliams" wrote:

> That's the point --it can't. On a restart or lease renewal it will state in
> the packet the original DHCP server (that is, this will kind of be directed
> at that box). However otherwise it will be random --based on which box
> answers first.
>
> --
> Paul Williams
>
> http://www.msresource.net/
> http://forums.msresource.net/
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory (More info?)

> Then how it is true that we can implement two DHCP Servers in a single
Domain?

Just because you cannot guarantee which server will service which client,
doesn't mean you cannot implement multiple servers. Although, as I said in
my original post, you should either implement two with a balanced scope, or
you would use a superscope (only needed in large LANs really).


> Secondly if we implemnet a DHCP Server in a Domian and other in Workgroup
then what will be the response of Computers to get IP from Domain or
Standalone DHCP Server.

As it's broadcast, whichever box responds first. Remember that the layer of
the TCP/IP stack that this is operating at has no idea what a domain is. So
it's irrelevant.

What's not irrelevant is directory authorisation...

--
Paul Williams

http://www.msresource.net/
http://forums.msresource.net/