RE: DHCP Puzzler posted 03/11/2004
- Subject: RE: DHCP Puzzler
- From: "Church, Chuck" <cchurch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:06:19 -0600
- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
- Thread-index: AcQF7L/ZsmFqphErTymHbB5BOBRQ6ABtYiww
- Thread-topic: DHCP Puzzler
Just a guess, but could they be BOOTP clients that don't adhere to a lease time?
Lead Design Engineer
CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE
Wam!Net Government Services
13665 Dulles Technology Dr. Ste 250
Herndon, VA 20171
PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=index&search=cchurch%40wamnetgov.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kenneth Wygand [mailto:KWygand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 10:40 AM
> To: ccielab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: DHCP Puzzler
> I have an interesting scenario that I can't explain. I'm looking at a
> 3640 router running as a DHCP server with a "standard" configuration -
> no conflict logging, just a specified pool and an excluded range for
> static addresses. No hard-coded MAC addresses or permanent entries.
> Yet when I run a "show ip dhcp binding", I see several entries whose
> lease expiration is listed as "infinite". I have the lease
> time set for
> 1 hour, and all of the other addresses are adhering to this
> configuration. Why would some entries be listed as infinite?
> As far as
> I know, the DHCP server dictates the least time, not the DHCP client.
> Hmm... anyone have any clues? :-)
> Kenneth E. Wygand
> Systems Engineer, Project Services
> CISSP #37102, CCNP, CCDP, ACSP, Cisco IPT Design Specialist, MCP, CNA,
> Network+, A+
> Custom Computer Specialists, Inc.
> "The only unattainable goal is the one not attempted."
> Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study
> materials from:
> Subscription information may be found at: