Re: Large-scale debian installation, request help
Quoting Hamish Moffatt (hamish@debian.org):
> I have no experience in large-scale installation so I cannot assist
> you there unfortunately. However, would you consider bootp instead of
> DHCP? BOOTP is more Unix-native (DHCP is a Microsoftism). Admittedly
> DHCP has some nice extensions to BOOTP, however since BOOTP always
> matches IP addresses to hardware (Ethernet) addresses, I think administration
> may well be easier. That is, BOOTP does not dynamically assign addresses
> from a pool, while DHCP does by default.
That's just silly. DHCP is a internet standard protocol, with a lot of
functionality that makes it far superior to BOOTP, (e.g., DHCP has
support for more fields, and multiple DHCP servers can serve the same
subnet for increased reliability). DHCP has three modes of operation,
one which assigns addresses dynamically (for a finite period), one which
assigns addresses automatically (but permanently), and one which assigns
them statically. How is BOOTP easier to administer because you _have to_
map every MAC to an IP? DHCP does everything BOOTP does, and far more.
Yes, MS uses DHCP, but it also uses TCP; should we get rid of TCP also?
Mike Stone
P.S. Some of the UNIX manufacturers ship with DHCP support by default:
e.g., when you plug a new SGI into your network it tries to configure
itself via DHCP. I guess it is used outside MS.
Reply to: