Bug 127055
| Summary: | dhcpd example error in System Administration Guide | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 | Reporter: | Ian Laurie <nixuser> |
| Component: | rhel-sag | Assignee: | Sandra Moore <smoore> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 3.0 | CC: | adstrong, andriusb, jha, jvdias |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2005-01-13 18:25:33 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 123819 | ||
Ian,
Thanks so much for your reply! You are correct!
So the subnet declaration for the second subnet
should be:
subnet 192.168.1.32 netmask 255.255.255.224 { ...
};
It will be reflected in the next version of our docs out shortly! :-)
If you have any more questions or comments, please do not hesitate to
contact us directly or in the bug!
Andrius.
Andrius, Are you sure? Doesn't that still leave the second subnet as a "sub-set" of the first subnet? Shouldn't the subnet mask be 255.255.255.224 for both? That would make them exclusive I think. Ian Ian, yes, that sounds better! :-) Jason, what do you think? Would these two new subnets be able to reach the router though (192.169.1.254)? I think this example has two subnets that can see the same router...
shared-network name {
option domain-name "test.redhat.com";
option domain-name-servers ns1.redhat.com, ns2.redhat.com;
option routers 192.168.0.254;
more parameters for EXAMPLE shared-network
subnet 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 {
parameters for subnet
range 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.254;
}
subnet 192.168.2.32 netmask 255.255.0.224 {
parameters for subnet
range 192.168.2.33 192.168.2.63;
}
}
Hi -
Actually, the two example should be:
shared-network name {
option domain-name "test.redhat.com";
option domain-name-servers ns1.redhat.com, ns2.redhat.com;
option routers 192.168.1.254;
# more parameters for EXAMPLE shared-network
subnet 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.128 {
parameters for subnet
range 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.127;
}
subnet 192.168.1.128 netmask 255.255.255.128 {
parameters for subnet
range 192.168.1.128 192.168.2.253;
}
}
Then both can see the router, and both subnets are non-overlapping.
Aargh!
range 192.168.1.128 192.168.2.253;
should of course be: ^
range 192.168.1.128 192.168.1.253;
^
How could a machine with and IP of 192.168.1.1 see 192.168.1.254 with your example? Wouldn't the first subnet have to be 255.255.255.0 to see the router? The second subnet will see the router since it's part of the subnet anyways... right? Please correct me if I'm a dufus... Simpler? :
shared-network name {
option domain-name "test.redhat.com";
option domain-name-servers ns1.redhat.com, ns2.redhat.com;
option routers 192.168.0.254;
more parameters for EXAMPLE shared-network
subnet 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.252.0 {
parameters for subnet
range 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.254;
}
subnet 192.168.2.32 netmask 255.255.252.0 {
parameters for subnet
range 192.168.2.1 192.168.2.254;
}
}
Simpler? (fixed):
shared-network name {
option domain-name "test.redhat.com";
option domain-name-servers ns1.redhat.com, ns2.redhat.com;
option routers 192.168.0.254;
more parameters for EXAMPLE shared-network
subnet 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.252.0 {
parameters for subnet
range 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.254;
}
subnet 192.168.2.0 netmask 255.255.252.0 {
parameters for subnet
range 192.168.2.1 192.168.2.254;
}
}
For the record, can I say I hate dealing with subnetting? ;-) You and everyone else :-) I'm going with my last example for the RHEL4 docs... thanks to everyone who gave input! :-) |
From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 Description of problem: I'm trying to grasp the wonders of dhcpd configuration. Code example 25-2 in rhel-sag-en seems to be wrong: shared-network name { option domain-name "test.redhat.com"; option domain-name-servers ns1.redhat.com, ns2.redhat.com; option routers 192.168.1.254; more parameters for EXAMPLE shared-network subnet 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 { parameters for subnet range 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.31; } subnet 192.168.1.32 netmask 255.255.255.0 { parameters for subnet range 192.168.1.33 192.168.1.63; } } Seems to me the two subnet declarations define the same subnet. Perhaps the netmask needs to be something like 255.255.255.224 instead? Or do I have this wrong? Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): rhel-sag-en-3-4 How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. View Guide 2. 3. Additional info: