DHCP offer delay
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Initial data:
1. Two DHCP servers:
First:
Description: Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.10 (squeeze)
Release: 6.0.10
Codename: squeeze
Second
NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
VERSION_ID="8"
VERSION="8 (jessie)"
ID=debian
2. One network, let's say 192.168.0.0/24
3. Two interfaces 192.168.0.1 and 192.168.0.2, one per each DHCP server. Both are working and offering addresses from one subnet, but pool for first dhcp is .10-.20 gateway ip.1, pool for second ip.21-.31 with gateway ip.2
4. Task - devices in that network should receive addresses from DHCP #2 rather than DHCP #1. Why so? Main task is to migrate from one system to another, so i can't simply disconnect all devices - those of them, that are working now, must stay in working state. It's TV migration in Hotel.
5. What i've tryed? My thought was to manually increase delay in response of DCHP #1 on DHCP request from client.
6. Commands used on DHCP #1:
tc qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1: prio
tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 1:3 handle 30: netem delay 500ms
tc filter add dev eth1 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 3 u32 match ip sport 67 0xffff flowid 1:3
tc filter add dev eth1 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 3 u32 match ip dport 68 0xffff flowid 1:3
7. Result: pinging DHCP #1 from device, i see delays in 500+ ms, but when i perform rebute of device and issueing "tcpdump -n -i eth1 portrange 67-68" command on both DHCP servers, or command "tail -f /var/log/syslog" for more details, i see, that DHCP #1 replies faster, than DHCP #2.
I will be very gratefull for ideas and clues, what to do else, or another solution. Thank you!
linux debian dhcp
asked May 29 at 23:30
Alexandr Anufriev
3619
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Initial data:
1. Two DHCP servers:
First:
Description: Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.10 (squeeze)
Release: 6.0.10
Codename: squeeze
Second
NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
VERSION_ID="8"
VERSION="8 (jessie)"
ID=debian
2. One network, let's say 192.168.0.0/24
3. Two interfaces 192.168.0.1 and 192.168.0.2, one per each DHCP server. Both are working and offering addresses from one subnet, but pool for first dhcp is .10-.20 gateway ip.1, pool for second ip.21-.31 with gateway ip.2
4. Task - devices in that network should receive addresses from DHCP #2 rather than DHCP #1. Why so? Main task is to migrate from one system to another, so i can't simply disconnect all devices - those of them, that are working now, must stay in working state. It's TV migration in Hotel.
5. What i've tryed? My thought was to manually increase delay in response of DCHP #1 on DHCP request from client.
6. Commands used on DHCP #1:
tc qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1: prio
tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 1:3 handle 30: netem delay 500ms
tc filter add dev eth1 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 3 u32 match ip sport 67 0xffff flowid 1:3
tc filter add dev eth1 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 3 u32 match ip dport 68 0xffff flowid 1:3
7. Result: pinging DHCP #1 from device, i see delays in 500+ ms, but when i perform rebute of device and issueing "tcpdump -n -i eth1 portrange 67-68" command on both DHCP servers, or command "tail -f /var/log/syslog" for more details, i see, that DHCP #1 replies faster, than DHCP #2.
I will be very gratefull for ideas and clues, what to do else, or another solution. Thank you!
linux debian dhcp
asked May 29 at 23:30
Alexandr Anufriev
3619
If all devices should get addresses from #2, what do you need #1 for? Turning it off won't invalidate existing client leases. Or do you need some devices to continue to renew leases on #1?
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 1:12
Yes i do, As i saisd it's TVs and it's about 400 of them in hotel. I cant turn off DHCP #1 because it will affect guests. After changing DHCP server TV should be reconfigured and I cant simply walk in room and say: "Hello, I need your remote control, you can stay in bed".
– Alexandr Anufriev
May 30 at 9:06
What's your lease time on #1? Nothing you've said suggests that turning off #1 would cause a problem. Can you explain the issue that the devices would have if you turn it off (and leave #2 on)? Everything should just work.
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 13:22
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Initial data:
1. Two DHCP servers:
First:
Description: Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.10 (squeeze)
Release: 6.0.10
Codename: squeeze
Second
NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
VERSION_ID="8"
VERSION="8 (jessie)"
ID=debian
2. One network, let's say 192.168.0.0/24
3. Two interfaces 192.168.0.1 and 192.168.0.2, one per each DHCP server. Both are working and offering addresses from one subnet, but pool for first dhcp is .10-.20 gateway ip.1, pool for second ip.21-.31 with gateway ip.2
4. Task - devices in that network should receive addresses from DHCP #2 rather than DHCP #1. Why so? Main task is to migrate from one system to another, so i can't simply disconnect all devices - those of them, that are working now, must stay in working state. It's TV migration in Hotel.
5. What i've tryed? My thought was to manually increase delay in response of DCHP #1 on DHCP request from client.
6. Commands used on DHCP #1:
tc qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1: prio
tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 1:3 handle 30: netem delay 500ms
tc filter add dev eth1 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 3 u32 match ip sport 67 0xffff flowid 1:3
tc filter add dev eth1 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 3 u32 match ip dport 68 0xffff flowid 1:3
7. Result: pinging DHCP #1 from device, i see delays in 500+ ms, but when i perform rebute of device and issueing "tcpdump -n -i eth1 portrange 67-68" command on both DHCP servers, or command "tail -f /var/log/syslog" for more details, i see, that DHCP #1 replies faster, than DHCP #2.
I will be very gratefull for ideas and clues, what to do else, or another solution. Thank you!
linux debian dhcp
asked May 29 at 23:30
Alexandr Anufriev
3619
Initial data:
1. Two DHCP servers:
First:
Description: Debian GNU/Linux 6.0.10 (squeeze)
Release: 6.0.10
Codename: squeeze
Second
NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
VERSION_ID="8"
VERSION="8 (jessie)"
ID=debian
2. One network, let's say 192.168.0.0/24
3. Two interfaces 192.168.0.1 and 192.168.0.2, one per each DHCP server. Both are working and offering addresses from one subnet, but pool for first dhcp is .10-.20 gateway ip.1, pool for second ip.21-.31 with gateway ip.2
4. Task - devices in that network should receive addresses from DHCP #2 rather than DHCP #1. Why so? Main task is to migrate from one system to another, so i can't simply disconnect all devices - those of them, that are working now, must stay in working state. It's TV migration in Hotel.
5. What i've tryed? My thought was to manually increase delay in response of DCHP #1 on DHCP request from client.
6. Commands used on DHCP #1:
tc qdisc add dev eth1 root handle 1: prio
tc qdisc add dev eth1 parent 1:3 handle 30: netem delay 500ms
tc filter add dev eth1 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 3 u32 match ip sport 67 0xffff flowid 1:3
tc filter add dev eth1 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 3 u32 match ip dport 68 0xffff flowid 1:3
7. Result: pinging DHCP #1 from device, i see delays in 500+ ms, but when i perform rebute of device and issueing "tcpdump -n -i eth1 portrange 67-68" command on both DHCP servers, or command "tail -f /var/log/syslog" for more details, i see, that DHCP #1 replies faster, than DHCP #2.
I will be very gratefull for ideas and clues, what to do else, or another solution. Thank you!
linux debian dhcp
asked May 29 at 23:30
Alexandr Anufriev
3619
asked May 29 at 23:30
Alexandr Anufriev
3619
asked May 29 at 23:30
Alexandr Anufriev
3619
asked May 29 at 23:30
Alexandr Anufriev
3619
3619
If all devices should get addresses from #2, what do you need #1 for? Turning it off won't invalidate existing client leases. Or do you need some devices to continue to renew leases on #1?
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 1:12
Yes i do, As i saisd it's TVs and it's about 400 of them in hotel. I cant turn off DHCP #1 because it will affect guests. After changing DHCP server TV should be reconfigured and I cant simply walk in room and say: "Hello, I need your remote control, you can stay in bed".
– Alexandr Anufriev
May 30 at 9:06
What's your lease time on #1? Nothing you've said suggests that turning off #1 would cause a problem. Can you explain the issue that the devices would have if you turn it off (and leave #2 on)? Everything should just work.
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 13:22
add a comment |Â
If all devices should get addresses from #2, what do you need #1 for? Turning it off won't invalidate existing client leases. Or do you need some devices to continue to renew leases on #1?
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 1:12
Yes i do, As i saisd it's TVs and it's about 400 of them in hotel. I cant turn off DHCP #1 because it will affect guests. After changing DHCP server TV should be reconfigured and I cant simply walk in room and say: "Hello, I need your remote control, you can stay in bed".
– Alexandr Anufriev
May 30 at 9:06
What's your lease time on #1? Nothing you've said suggests that turning off #1 would cause a problem. Can you explain the issue that the devices would have if you turn it off (and leave #2 on)? Everything should just work.
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 13:22
If all devices should get addresses from #2, what do you need #1 for? Turning it off won't invalidate existing client leases. Or do you need some devices to continue to renew leases on #1?
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 1:12
If all devices should get addresses from #2, what do you need #1 for? Turning it off won't invalidate existing client leases. Or do you need some devices to continue to renew leases on #1?
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 1:12
Yes i do, As i saisd it's TVs and it's about 400 of them in hotel. I cant turn off DHCP #1 because it will affect guests. After changing DHCP server TV should be reconfigured and I cant simply walk in room and say: "Hello, I need your remote control, you can stay in bed".
– Alexandr Anufriev
May 30 at 9:06
Yes i do, As i saisd it's TVs and it's about 400 of them in hotel. I cant turn off DHCP #1 because it will affect guests. After changing DHCP server TV should be reconfigured and I cant simply walk in room and say: "Hello, I need your remote control, you can stay in bed".
– Alexandr Anufriev
May 30 at 9:06
What's your lease time on #1? Nothing you've said suggests that turning off #1 would cause a problem. Can you explain the issue that the devices would have if you turn it off (and leave #2 on)? Everything should just work.
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 13:22
What's your lease time on #1? Nothing you've said suggests that turning off #1 would cause a problem. Can you explain the issue that the devices would have if you turn it off (and leave #2 on)? Everything should just work.
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 13:22
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
The IP that a DHCP server gives out doesn't become invalid if the DHCP server becomes unavailable. So unless there's more to the story that you haven't added to your question, this shouldn't be too difficult.
- All the devices request IPs from server #1 and get it with a valid lease (say 1 hour).
- Shut down DHCP server #1. All the devices remain in pool #1.
- After 50% of the lease has expired (30 minutes in this example), the device will attempt to renew the lease. Since the server is down, the renewal will fail, but the device will continue to use its valid pool 1 IP address.
- After 87.5% of the lease has expired (7.5 minutes of lease remaining), the client will do a DHCPDISCOVER and accept new leases. At this point it should get a valid address from DHCP server #2 and get an IP address in pool 2.
- After the lease period has expired, all your clients should be in pool2.
answered May 30 at 15:39
BowlOfRed
2,315612
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
The IP that a DHCP server gives out doesn't become invalid if the DHCP server becomes unavailable. So unless there's more to the story that you haven't added to your question, this shouldn't be too difficult.
- All the devices request IPs from server #1 and get it with a valid lease (say 1 hour).
- Shut down DHCP server #1. All the devices remain in pool #1.
- After 50% of the lease has expired (30 minutes in this example), the device will attempt to renew the lease. Since the server is down, the renewal will fail, but the device will continue to use its valid pool 1 IP address.
- After 87.5% of the lease has expired (7.5 minutes of lease remaining), the client will do a DHCPDISCOVER and accept new leases. At this point it should get a valid address from DHCP server #2 and get an IP address in pool 2.
- After the lease period has expired, all your clients should be in pool2.
answered May 30 at 15:39
BowlOfRed
2,315612
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
The IP that a DHCP server gives out doesn't become invalid if the DHCP server becomes unavailable. So unless there's more to the story that you haven't added to your question, this shouldn't be too difficult.
- All the devices request IPs from server #1 and get it with a valid lease (say 1 hour).
- Shut down DHCP server #1. All the devices remain in pool #1.
- After 50% of the lease has expired (30 minutes in this example), the device will attempt to renew the lease. Since the server is down, the renewal will fail, but the device will continue to use its valid pool 1 IP address.
- After 87.5% of the lease has expired (7.5 minutes of lease remaining), the client will do a DHCPDISCOVER and accept new leases. At this point it should get a valid address from DHCP server #2 and get an IP address in pool 2.
- After the lease period has expired, all your clients should be in pool2.
answered May 30 at 15:39
BowlOfRed
2,315612
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
The IP that a DHCP server gives out doesn't become invalid if the DHCP server becomes unavailable. So unless there's more to the story that you haven't added to your question, this shouldn't be too difficult.
- All the devices request IPs from server #1 and get it with a valid lease (say 1 hour).
- Shut down DHCP server #1. All the devices remain in pool #1.
- After 50% of the lease has expired (30 minutes in this example), the device will attempt to renew the lease. Since the server is down, the renewal will fail, but the device will continue to use its valid pool 1 IP address.
- After 87.5% of the lease has expired (7.5 minutes of lease remaining), the client will do a DHCPDISCOVER and accept new leases. At this point it should get a valid address from DHCP server #2 and get an IP address in pool 2.
- After the lease period has expired, all your clients should be in pool2.
answered May 30 at 15:39
BowlOfRed
2,315612
The IP that a DHCP server gives out doesn't become invalid if the DHCP server becomes unavailable. So unless there's more to the story that you haven't added to your question, this shouldn't be too difficult.
- All the devices request IPs from server #1 and get it with a valid lease (say 1 hour).
- Shut down DHCP server #1. All the devices remain in pool #1.
- After 50% of the lease has expired (30 minutes in this example), the device will attempt to renew the lease. Since the server is down, the renewal will fail, but the device will continue to use its valid pool 1 IP address.
- After 87.5% of the lease has expired (7.5 minutes of lease remaining), the client will do a DHCPDISCOVER and accept new leases. At this point it should get a valid address from DHCP server #2 and get an IP address in pool 2.
- After the lease period has expired, all your clients should be in pool2.
answered May 30 at 15:39
BowlOfRed
2,315612
answered May 30 at 15:39
BowlOfRed
2,315612
answered May 30 at 15:39
BowlOfRed
2,315612
answered May 30 at 15:39
BowlOfRed
2,315612
2,315612
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f446806%2fdhcp-offer-delay%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
If all devices should get addresses from #2, what do you need #1 for? Turning it off won't invalidate existing client leases. Or do you need some devices to continue to renew leases on #1?
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 1:12
Yes i do, As i saisd it's TVs and it's about 400 of them in hotel. I cant turn off DHCP #1 because it will affect guests. After changing DHCP server TV should be reconfigured and I cant simply walk in room and say: "Hello, I need your remote control, you can stay in bed".
– Alexandr Anufriev
May 30 at 9:06
What's your lease time on #1? Nothing you've said suggests that turning off #1 would cause a problem. Can you explain the issue that the devices would have if you turn it off (and leave #2 on)? Everything should just work.
– BowlOfRed
May 30 at 13:22