DHCP netsus appliance

[sstungate]

Hi,

I came across this issue yesterday in that the Windows DHCP server was requesting ip addresses from the netsus appliance with netboot turned on. Firstly is the netboot service able to be turned off on the appliance and have netboot enabled.

There was 2 huge syslog files that were full of ip address requests which were taking up 30 GB of disk space. I don't need DHCP enabled when we already have a Windows DHCP server on the network. fyi The disk size was expanded.

The subnet settings are 10.33.24.0/21.
Or does the server have to be moved to another subnet

The ideal solution is to turn off dhcp and have netboot enabled.

[jarednichols]

As NetBoot (as is PXE) is a function of DHCP, DHCP must be enabled for the functionality. However, the NetSUS appliance does not hand out IP addresses, just NetBoot information. (I believe this was actually a code-level change to ISC DHCP that JAMF did to get it to do that.)

I suspect your Windows boxes or DNS/DHCP may not be configured properly if they're actually attempting to hit your NetSUS for IP info. Is it actual IP negotiation going on here or just broadcasts for IP info that just happen to be in the log files?

[misterfriendly]

I have a similar question:

My network is 192.168.1.0/16 (I know that's a huge range, but we only use 192.168.1.1 thru 192.168.4.255)

DHCP server is a Smoothwall appliance at 192.168.1.3.
My NetSUS is static IP 192.168.1.54, mask 255.255.0.0

I tried setting up Netboot with subnet 192.168.1.0/16 and it wouldn't enable due to dhcp errors (in /var/log/syslog).
But it started working when I changed the subnets to:
192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0
192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0 [the 'free for all' dhcp range]
192.168.4.0 255.255.255.0 [all Macs eventually get static assignments in this range]

Can someone reassure me that this setup isn't going to somehow screw up DHCP on my network? The NetSUS is definitely not handing out addresses to clients, correct? I'm also using a PXE imaging system for Windows clients and it still works, so that's a good sign.

We've had zero issues with DHCP up to now, so maybe I'm being over-cautious.