3

I need to replace an aging DHCP server by a fault tolerant solution. I consider using the ISC dhcp server solution which can be setup either as split servers serving non-overlapping ip ranges or as a master-slave cluster.

The network is of the SOHO type having less than 50 dynamic ip's and a a couple of reserved ip's. Only one subnet (/24). The network is composed of Windows clients, network printers and Linux servers.

I tested both solutions and they are both working ok. I only had one problem in the master-slave setup when the master time was offset to an extend that the slave couldn't properly sync despite desperately trying to catch up (95% cpu). Problem was solved by syncing time more frequently and never occurred again.

What's your experience and what would be the most stable and the most scalable solution?

Axel Beckert
  • 398
  • 2
  • 17
ripat
  • 173
  • 2
  • 10
  • Split servers will not give you high availability: if one server dies the networks will not be served. Multiple masters with shared leases will do it, but it usually requires something better than isc-dhcp, like kea with common replicated db. – grin Jan 11 '18 at 15:05

0 Answers0