topic Re: use static or DHCP? in Operating System - HP-UX

use static or DHCP?

Christine Hartman — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:07:49 GMT

I would like to know what most people use as "best practices" for servers in their data centers. Do they hardcode their ip address on their servers or do they DHCP (manual or Dynamic)? I am looking for what the industry uses more.

Re: use static or DHCP?

Pete Randall — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:09:27 GMT

Static.

Pete

Re: use static or DHCP?

Rita C Workman — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:12:27 GMT

Servers - static

Network Printers - static

Client PC's - DHCP (with very few exceptions)

Our general standard here...

Rgrds,
Rita

Re: use static or DHCP?

Patrick Wallek — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:12:54 GMT

Definitely static hardcoded.

Would you want the possibility of having a servers IP address change and then have applications stop working and people unable to access the server? I wouldn't!

Re: use static or DHCP?

Geoff Wild — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:13:20 GMT

Static for servers and DHCP for clients - unless clients need to be in a vpn/secure network...

Rgds...Geoff

Re: use static or DHCP?

Christine Hartman — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:14:36 GMT

thanks for the quick response. I am trying to make a case to use static IPs here for our servers...one of the network admins. are trying to force us to use M-DHCP for our servers. He has not given any compelling reasons 'Why'. If you have any reasons to help my case please let me know. Again thanks so much.

Re: use static or DHCP?

Pete Randall — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:17:33 GMT

The best reason I can think of is "why introduce unnecessary complexity?". I prefer the KISS method: Keep It Simple Stupid. That way, when you do have problems, there's one less layer to debug.

Pete

Re: use static or DHCP?

Patrick Wallek — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:20:46 GMT

See my response above -- If the IP of a server changes, chances are good that applications will BREAK!

Re: use static or DHCP?

Kelli Ward — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:34:08 GMT

One compelling reason not to use DHCP for say a printer or a server is:
How can your workstations ensure access to that server or printer, if it loses it's lease and obtains another with a different address?

BTW - We use almost exclusive static IP's here.

I have a thought, maybe your admin can make his DHCP server, it's client as well, wouldn't that solve everything? ;)

Good luck,
Kel

Re: use static or DHCP?

Geoff Wild — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:36:50 GMT

Plus - if they are using Micro$oft DNS with Allow Updates? - then watch out for DHCP hijacking - search Google for more info on this - we ran into that at our site - not because it was intentional - but because MS DHCP server don't clean up their PTR records when they update DNS....

Re: use static or DHCP?

John Dvorchak — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:38:06 GMT

Netjerk guys...Where do they come from? I think I would get a piece of paper and write in big letters "CLUE" on it. Then take it to the next meeting with the network admin and hold it up. Ask him if he has one of these.

But that is just my humble opinion.

Re: use static or DHCP?

John Poff — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:42:30 GMT

Hi,

Our network guys use DHCP for all the desktop and laptop Windows machines, and even the Windows servers, but for our Unix boxes we use all static IP addresses.

It's a minor issue if my laptop picks up a new IP address, but it would be a real headache to several hundred users if the big rp8400 running Oracle Financials in our MC/SG cluster suddenly got a new IP address. :)

JP

Re: use static or DHCP?

Christine Hartman — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:47:36 GMT

our DHCP server is on HPUX but will move to linux. Curious...how about static ip-ing linux servers and windows servers? There are some windows servers that run important applications too and email. The NT group has been battling this argument for a while now..because all of their stuff DHCPs. Now that they are implementing Active Directory they at times run into major network connectivity issues. I'm in the unix group and we have NEVER had to DHCP our servers in the past. It would be nice to push to standardize on ALL servers regardless of platform. Desktops and printers I'm not so worried about, but servers definately!

Re: use static or DHCP?

Tony Contratto — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:48:52 GMT

Our setup is the same as many have already stated:

Servers - Static
Clients - DHCP

If the network guy still insists on all servers being DHCP, I would suggest that you start with the DHCP and DNS servers first. Then, after you get those working, continue on to the others. :)

--
Tony

Re: use static or DHCP?

Kelli Ward — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 18:12:26 GMT

Hi,
I agree with Anthony.

If you're going to use DHCP at all and want standardization:

Servers - static
Workstations and desktops - DHCP

You just don't need the headaches of this server this way, that server the other and then tracking it all.

Good luck,
Kel

Re: use static or DHCP?

Rita C Workman — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 21:00:59 GMT

I didn't read every response...but why would you want to have servers set to static, as opposed to the DHCP the other guy wants?

Patrick mentions it...you will more than likely affect applications. Remember, alot of software gets its licensing codewords (passwords) from the IP of the server. Like OmniBack, and even many third party software products use the IP. Keep changing the IP and you'll be reloading license password/codewords every time you turn around.

To continue...let's say your an Oracle shop. How does your client resolve in it's tnsnames file. By server name (then the client must have the IP listed in either in it's hostfile or it references a DNS server); or maybe your tnsnames resolves to IP... Do you have MC/SG running on any of your servers...hmmm don't you have to have the IP for the pkg defined statically in your /etc/host file..

See the picture....look at your shop. Bet if you follow this logic that Patrick introduced you'll start realizing the whole can of worms this will cause.

Just my 2 cents,
Rita

Re: use static or DHCP?

Rita C Workman — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 21:10:28 GMT

Waiting for something to finish up, and I got to wondering....why is the network guy/gal so adamant about going DHCP? What is the problem with static on servers and certain network devices?

Is it that he/she is using only public IP's per chance? So maybe is running out of numbers?.....Could that be the issue? I would think that might be the only reason somebody would want to do something this lame....and then I would wonder if anybody had clued (like how I worked that in..) them in on using private numbers (like 10.x.x.x)for inside and then public number for outside.
Of course that would mean that your network person understands how to configure routers and firewalls properly to allow for translating these entries correctly.
Hmmmm...

But you didn't mention anything about your network...so I may just be rambling. Which is what I tend to do when I'm waiting on somebody else to finish up so I can start 'my work'.

Rgrds,
Rita

Re: use static or DHCP?

A. Clay Stephenson — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 21:20:10 GMT

By all means static; the last thing that I want is for a server's IP address to change. Moreover, if you are ever going to use ServiceGuard then the addresses of the packages/servers must be static. I would go one more level and insist that the dhcpd and dns servers be unix as well. Download the source from www.isc.org and compile. It is absolutely the best in the world; they developed it and maintain the standards.

The dhcpd from them is very powerful especially if you have users who might travel and attach over different subnets. ISC's dhcpd can even handle fixed ip addresses that vary according to the subnet - even with the same MAC address.

Re: use static or DHCP?

Steven E. Protter — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 22:18:21 GMT

static for servers.

There are many reasons, here are a few:

1) Server infrastructure needs to be doucmentted. You need to know what the IP address is, not guess.
2) You may want your server to work right even if DNS and DHCP servers aren't working properly.

SEP

Re: use static or DHCP?

Pete Randall — Tue, 08 Apr 2003 22:32:38 GMT

Frankly, Christine, I don't see any need for clients to use DHCP, either. We set up a pool of ip addresses way back when (far back enough that they were originally in /etc/hosts - all the windoze boxes that could potentially connect were pre-defined, with clever naming conventions so we could identify what floor and which section of the building they were on). When we tentatively poked our noses into the modern era and implemeted DNS, we still set up the pool of clients. When the Windoze "gurus" set up a new PC, they pick an IP address from the available pool and assign it. What does it take, an extra 15 seconds to scan and update the list? This ain't rocket science!

Pete