On Mon, 2004-06-14 at 09:47, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote: > At 07:55 6/14/2004, Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha wrote: > >Well, I won't argue with the maintainers, though I can't figure out what > >confusion could be caused by an interface the daemon never sees. > > BTW, although it's not much of an excuse I was very short on sleep and got > a little cranky with you. My bad... sorry. > > All my life I've configured dhcpd *only* for the one subnet on which I was > assigning addresses and limited the interfaces to which the server process > listened via the DHCPDARGS variable in /etc/sysconfig/dhcpd. Just like you. > Now, when investigating dhcpd for multiple interfaces and subnets, I was > told that the ideal procedure is to document all configured static subnets > to avoid some possible confusion on dhcpd's part... that is, not strictly > necessary but better. > > Since in this case the suggestion is also neater and seems to me more > thorough, I'm happy to take it and make it part of my standard operating > procedures. Besides, I'm happy to avoid "some possible confusion" that > might eventually happen in any of my systems! <smile> ---- I think that the maintainers have required a configuration section for all interfaces 'seen' by dhcpd whereas Red Hat, has allowed options in /etc/sysconfig/dhcpd, which are applied as arguments to the launch of the dhcpd daemon by the init.d script which allow you to designate which interfaces are 'seen'. Thus, if you configure only specific interfaces in /etc/sysconfig/dhcpd, then you only need refer to those interfaces in /etc/dhcpd.conf Craig
