[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

dhcp-dns problem



I've been working on setting up dhcp-dns on my system so that I can get
automatic name entries from DHCP. I've run into a problem, however.
First, on the DHCP side.

Some of the computers on the network have static leases set up so that
they'll always get the same IP address. Since installing dhcp-dns, they
now appear to be getting a dynamic IP along with their static IP, though
it is the same IP. While this is not a problem per se, it is clogging up
my syslog with lots of repetitive errors. Also, and I'm not sure if this
is related to the fact that these machines have static IP's, the dynamic
IP's are not getting any hostnames associated with them. These machines
are, coincidentally, the only Linux machines on the network and are all
running dhclient, so it could be a misconfiguration on my part. Any
ideas?

The other problem is with the actual DNS updating. As far as I can tell
after reading /usr/share/doc/dhcp-dns/README and making sure that
everything is set up right (including editing /etc/dhcp-dns.conf), I
have everything configured properly. But I'm still not getting any
updates in the DNS tables. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find any
record of dhcp-dns running or any errors from bind. Any suggestions as
to where I might be able to look for these?

And finally, I keep seeing references to BOOTP while looking around for
information. Unfortunately, I'm not very familiar with what BOOTP is.
All I know is that it allows a computer to get an IP address and some
basic network information. It sounds to me a lot like DHCP with some
options being passed. I don't HAVE to have all the machines in my
network listed in DNS, I just need to have them SOMEHOW accessible to
each other by name instead of just by IP. So if BOOTP (or any other
protocol) can handle this for me with a minimum amount of hassle I'd be
very happy to give it a shot. TIA for any help.

-Alex


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: