DHCP Trashed By Toos! Really?

“Until Microsoft devises a fix, if necessary, the software giant’s advice is simple: reboot your PC. Plusnet has told its customers to use static LAN IP addresses and fixed DNS settings, rather than obtaining this information automatically via DHCP, to reach the web.”
 
See Busted Windows 8, 10 update blamed for breaking Brits’ DHCP
I thank whatever gods may be that I escaped from That Other OS 17 years ago and don’t have to put up with degraded infrastructure on the whim of someone in Redmond, Washington state at 0600 in their time-zone whenever they wish to mess with me…

You can be free too. Use Debian GNU/Linux, the OS that works for you and not some monopolistic corporation on the other side of Earth.

See DHCP

UPDATE – Apparently it’s not just a few ISPs and their hardware… M$ is just refusing users to use their networks… See Botched Microsoft update knocks Windows 8, 10 PCs offline – regardless of ISP

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to DHCP Trashed By Toos! Really?

  1. oiaohm says:

    Openbook exams using Google, is NOT a certification numb-nuts! About the ONLY thing you are certified to do is sling a mop, at the dial-up service provider you perform janitorial services for.
    dougman please go and read the Australia TAFE system requirements for IT qualifications. Australian system a certificate from TAFE is one of the certifications.

    The reality is you are idiot who does not have a clue. All entry level IT certifications are openbook exams even in the USA. All your comment does is show you are absolutely clueless.

  2. dougman says:

    “Dougman my answers here does show that I am at least Cert 5. ”

    Openbook exams using Google, is NOT a certification numb-nuts! About the ONLY thing you are certified to do is sling a mop, at the dial-up service provider you perform janitorial services for.

  3. oiaohm says:

    You get things like the faster device stealing the slower device’s connection or broken connections/timeouts. ARP/pings and higher level networking protocols may not work as intended.
    All these faults Robert list are in fact switch dependant.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation

    Its the link aggregation support in switches you are depending on when you do layer 2 and layer 4 Load Balancing other than special cases like DHCP.

    In a LAN setup using the same IP and mac address for devices that service the same task with link aggregation supporting switches using xor separation is fine. Why because each client machine will be talking to a single server selected by the switch/switches.

    This is why you have virtual address where you can set more than 1 IP address address to single Ethernet port. If you have two servers sharing the same primary IP address and mac addresses due to having to use layer 2 link aggregation(yes some old switches it the only way its going to work) you need a different IP address so you can in fact individually manage the servers and know what one you are managing.

    The idea that 2 machines with the same IP in a network is bad is kind of wrong.

    2 machines with the same IP address connected to a switch that does not do link aggregation with xor splitting of traffic is wrong in most cases. 2 servers connected with the same IP address to a link aggregation switch can get tricking to do diagnostics.

    DHCP is a special case its a single packet protocol with single packet responses. So that protocol shuffling between servers does not hurt things. Something like internal HTTP servers using the same IP address is absolutely dependant on the switch being link aggregation supporting. Only fairly recently have you got the means to put in 2 or more switches so that you servers can be connected to different switches and still work properly. Historically link aggregation allowed you to use the same IP address twice but forced everything to be connected to 1 switch so that switch was the single point of failure.

    This is not exactly new the feature only appears year 2000 only really comes good with the 2008 features. This might be a little new for Robert. The faults Roberts lists is why you should not do multi devices with the same IP address with random hardware. Not that you should not do multi devices with same IP if you have suitable network hardware. In fact its handy to know this because you can exploit link aggregation in some switches to allow you to start up a server and have it take over the workload of the server you are planing on shutting down without the clients seeing a IP or mac address change.

    There are reasons for 2 devices to have the same IP address on the network and it can be quite a good idea. Done carelessly is quite a bad idea.

    Dhcp is the most common example of 2 or more devices having the same IP address and not needing specialist hardware. There are a few other protocols that don’t use unique IP addresses as well.

    dougman basically you are clueless and not willing to ask properly. I have provided this information for Robert not for you the idiot dougman.

    Dougman my answers here does show that I am at least Cert 5. Yet you have shown you are not even Cert 2.

    What certifications do you have orange grove picker.
    The reality is you don’t have the Certifications so you cannot not work it out for yourself. You are attempt to guess I am not qualified because you have no qualifications of merit to allow you to guess properly dougman.

    Please note links documentation is part of doing up to Cert 5 qualifications in Australia. As the tests are if you are competent to do the work and can find the correct answers not write stuff. So up to Cert 5 you do not need major english writing ability. So qualified person english writing requirements is quite low.

  4. dougman says:

    “You ask that question as if I suggested it’s a good idea. It’s not. You get things like the faster device stealing the slower device’s connection or broken connections/timeouts. ”

    At least you Robert, are the slightly fair and honest one. Fifi, eh, he dives into Google and tries to explain it away by using load-balancing servers and other mindless drivel.

  5. dougman wrote, “Why would you have two of the same IP address’s on the same LAN?”

    You ask that question as if I suggested it’s a good idea. It’s not. You get things like the faster device stealing the slower device’s connection or broken connections/timeouts. ARP/pings and higher level networking protocols may not work as intended. In fact, intent may become meaningless with multiple devices talking over each other.

    It may well be that one has multiple DHCP servers. Sometimes you want that to deal with high volumes of requests and in my case, I may want it to deal with different subnets. One either sets up conditions for redundant performance or elimination of contention. In schools I’ve done it with GNU/Linux DHCP beating That Other OS regularly to configure a lab. You can’t count on that always working but it was easy to set up. Normally, one checks for clients of TOOS and clients of GNU/Linux and having GNU/Linux only serve the GNU/Linux machines.

  6. dougman says:

    Still did not answer the question Robert. I think the best response at this point in time is “You don’t know.”

  7. dougman wrote, “why someone would have two DHCP servers at home?”

    That’s pretty easy, wireless and wired devices may benefit by having two DHCP servers. It’s faster not to have the wireless devices go through an extra layer. Also, for security one may want wireless on a different subnet. Some wireless routers are rather simple devices and can’t handle multiple subnets. Mine, for instance, allows a single range of IP-addresses for wireless or wired clients.

  8. Deaf Spy says:

    Dougman, I see you fail to grasp the technical competence of Fifi. How did Robert put it?
    I like oiaohm. He writes complete thoughts, for instance, instead of strawmen-innuendo.

    The Wise Man of the Bush meets the Wise Man of the Cold North…

  9. dougman says:

    “dougman setting up multi DHCP servers in the one IP range and not having them conflict is certificate II qualification work in Australia.”

    What certifications do you have orange grove picker.

    “The lowest IT qualification there is other than basic computer usage.”

    You represent the lowest IQ qualification for all of Australia.

  10. oiaohm says:

    dougman setting up multi DHCP servers in the one IP range and not having them conflict is certificate II qualification work in Australia. The lowest IT qualification there is other than basic computer usage.

    Of course you want to say I don’t work in IT because the reality by the level mistake you are making here you have not done the most basic qualifications. Cert II students should know that DHCP server is 255.255.255.255 and unassigned IP address devices are 0.0.0.0.

  11. dougman says:

    “The worse I have see is 5 DHCP servers on 5 different devices”

    LIES…you have never worked in the tech industry, less make it out of your ugly mothers basement.

    Yes, I am a dump ass. I be dumping over your DUMB ass!

  12. oiaohm says:

    We were discussing the same IP addresses on DEVICES, not DHCP servers dumb-ass, before you interjected your useless drivel.
    dougman what is the IP address of a device without a set or assigned IP address by IPv4 the answer is 0.0.0.0
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.0.0.0
    So its quite common to have many devices on an network when DHCP goes down having all the same IP address.

    So DHCP the very topic that this was about has the case of Layer-4 Load Balancing. The load balancing is from the clients to the DHCP server and the DHCP discover is to destination 255.255.255.255.

    So you now have two IP addresses. If you have two DHCP servers both DHCP servers are sitting on 255.255.255.255 and the clients after IP addresses are all sitting on 0.0.0.0 IP.

    The fact it done in DHCP is why you see it done in Layer-4 Load Balancing just with different IP numbers 255.255.255.255 replaced with a fixed IP number.

    Why would you have two DHCP servers in a network at home really shows lack of experence. Never underestimate how insane some home networks are. The worse I have see is 5 DHCP servers on 5 different devices in the ip number to allocate range not overlapping but all in exactly the same subnet. So every time a person who does not know exactly what they are doing adds a wifi router to extend wifi coverage they configure the dhcp up not overlapping allocating zones but overlapping subnet and uses the lan port on the wifi router leading to horible dhcp what the.

    In business it appears in cases of parallel redundancy.

    Of course there are other usages of items assigned the same IP address in a network for fall over set-ups.

    Of course dougman you failed because I made a mistake and you completely missed it. DHCP servers are 255.255.255.255 IP destination address on packet they receive.

    Sorry dougman you are a dump ass who does not know enough even to pick up errors on networking stuff.

  13. dougman says:

    “What is the IP address for IPv4 DHCP. The answer is 0.0.0.0 guess what happens when you set up 2 DHCP servers on a network. You now have two devices using the same IP address being 0.0.0.0. ”

    We were discussing the same IP addresses on DEVICES, not DHCP servers dumb-ass, before you interjected your useless drivel. Also, the LAN in question is a residential setting, not a business. Please explain, why someone would have two DHCP servers at home? In fact, why even bother to deploy one, when the modem provided to you does it all to begin with? Are you of the faith that prefers to build 90’s version of servers for printing, DHCP, routing as Robert does?

    Ham-Dong you need some Load Balancing in your brain!

  14. oiaohm says:

    dougman so you did not want the answer. You just wanted to prove that you an absolutely insulting idiot.

    Of course, you won’t provide evidence as there isn’t any! You cannot provide one reason as to why two separate devices would share the same IP on the same LAN. Now, I don’t know about you, but the rest of those that visit here, it would sure seem that YOU are the one without a clue.
    No because you are an absolute moron.

    What is the IP address for IPv4 DHCP. The answer is 0.0.0.0 guess what happens when you set up 2 DHCP servers on a network. You now have two devices using the same IP address being 0.0.0.0. That is Layer-4 Load Balancing. There are other services using same IP address assigned to two different devices other than 0.0.0.0 that are not DHCP that I could reference.

    Now idiot dougman answer Layer-2 Load Balancing example or admit you have absolute no clue and the only reason why you are here is to insult people and lie.

  15. dougman says:

    “Dougman if you don’t use my handle you don’t want the answer.”

    Fifi, you are a butt-hurt whining wanker.

    “So 1 request properly.”

    Does this include TPS reports? Like I anyone is going to request anything from lowly scum such as yourself.

    “2 post a sorry on that post for being insulting as proof you want the answer”

    Ok sure. You are a sorry waste of human excrement.

    “3 agree to never insult me again when I prove that you don’t have a clue.”

    I would never insult anyone unless it is fitting, factual and forthright.

    “There is something particular about load balancing that can result in 2 devices on network having the same ip address. Not like I did not provide the titles to research to find the answer youself.”

    Of course, you won’t provide evidence as there isn’t any! You cannot provide one reason as to why two separate devices would share the same IP on the same LAN. Now, I don’t know about you, but the rest of those that visit here, it would sure seem that YOU are the one without a clue.

  16. oiaohm says:

    Fifi, you bullshit does nothing to counter my question. There is no reason to share the same IP, on the same LAN with two independent devices.

    Name one reason why that should be applied.
    http://mrpogson.com/2016/12/11/canadas-syrian-refugees-one-year-later/#comment-365351
    Dougman if you don’t use my handle you don’t want the answer. So 1 request properly. 2 post a sorry on that post for being insulting as proof you want the answer 3 agree to never insult me again when I prove that you don’t have a clue. There is something particular about load balancing that can result in 2 devices on network having the same ip address. Not like I did not provide the titles to research to find the answer youself.

  17. dougman says:

    Fifi, you bullshit does nothing to counter my question. There is no reason to share the same IP, on the same LAN with two independent devices.

    Name one reason why that should be applied.

  18. oiaohm says:

    Why would you have two of the same IP address’s on the same LAN? Unless some over-zealous person manually assigned the same IP to different devices, eh?
    There is a very particular case dougman. For someone who says they know when a DBA is required you should have know that answer.

    Layer-2 Load Balancing and Layer-4 Load Balancing both can end with machines having the same IP address in a LAN. High availability automatic fall over.

    Also one network for lan and one network for wan can be kinda required. Some of the ISPs in Australia provide routers that only talk to 1 computer effectively. So you want to run more than 1 computer you need to by a wifi router or install a PC server in the middle or have you internet transfer speed total cut in half when ever more than 1 computer is on. So 1 computer 100 percent speed 2 computers 25 percent of the speed each. So it is a question how bad are you ISP provided modem routers.

    Wifi routers have a wan port for a reason to deal with ISP modem routers that are horrible failures. So running 2 lans in a home network is way more common than most people would like to consider lot of cases is mandatory if you want to run more than 1 computer/device.

    So dougman question about running two network in a home network and thinking it business only just shows complete lack of experience.

  19. dougman says:

    “You do realize the consequences/chaos of having two devices with the same IP address on a LAN, eh?”

    Why would you have two of the same IP address’s on the same LAN? Unless some over-zealous person manually assigned the same IP to different devices, eh?

  20. dougman wrote, “seems rather suspicious if you ask me. I see that being implemented for a business, but for a residence?”

    You do realize the consequences/chaos of having two devices with the same IP address on a LAN, eh? I haven’t read TFM but I don’t think the wireless router will act like a switch. It expects to be a router between two subnets. I could read the manual and check but it’s just easier to put the router’s clients on a different subnet.

  21. dougman says:

    “When Beast IV arrives”

    Wait, did you order a “Wintel” box?

    Two subnets? One for LAN and one for WAN…hmmm, seems rather suspicious if you ask me. I see that being implemented for a business, but for a residence?

  22. dougman wrote, “Subnet, for what? What are you hiding Robert?”

    Now, the router also does wifi. When Beast IV arrives, it will be the router. I will use the old router as a wifi access point. It’s WAN port which now goes to the ISP will go to Beast. I’d like the WAN and LAN ports to be on different subnets. Do I need to draw you a picture. The old router maxes out at 100 mbits/s but the ISP promises 150.

  23. dougman says:

    “a new subnet for wifi.”

    Subnet, for what? What are you hiding Robert?

  24. kurkosdr wrote, “The hidden cost of Linux which rears its ugly head when you have committed and it is too late.”

    One needs the same info to set up a DHCP server in TOOS. I’ve done that…

    The sample configurations and man pages help get the syntax of dhcp.conf right but it can be a bulky file with lots of subnets and hosts sometimes. ISC-HHCP-Server does check the syntax at startup so you can have surprises. I don’t think it’s any more difficult than TOOS. If you have lots of hosts specified in TOOS you have a lot of typing to do whereas in GNU/Linux I can just grab the MACs from logs and generate the list of hosts for the dhcp.conf file. I think that’s faster than typing and pointing and clicking and typing etc. At one place where I set up ~100 thin clients a barcode reader was available to to get the MACs off the boxes but I don’t remember whether I used that or not. I expect the Wiz could tell us how he did it with TOOS but of course that’s why they paid him the big bucks. For my little network DHCP isn’t much of a problem.

  25. dougman wrote, “When are you building your next DHCP server?”

    When I buy my new ARMed server. I will just copy over the present DHCP configuration with a slight addition, a new subnet for wifi.

  26. Kurkosdr says:

    Setting it up is a pain sometimes however, but that’s why we’re paid the big bucks.

    Admin costs: The hidden cost of Linux which rears its ugly head when you have committed and it is too late.

    As regards the original post: This is what happens when you hire as CEO a Hipster who thinks testing in production is a good idea.

  27. dougman says:

    When are you building your next DHCP server?

  28. Ivan wrote, “I’m not even going to point out that you ignore every single time DHCP is broken by Debian.”

    Beast has been doing DHCP for about 13 years and I don’t ever recall DHCP being broken, by Debian or anyone else. There are a few bug reports on file but most of them are configuration problems or systemd, not the package itself. ISC has always had a very fussy server but I don’t recall it ever not working for me. Setting it up is a pain sometimes however, but that’s why we’re paid the big bucks.

  29. Ivan says:

    I’m not even going to point out that you ignore every single time DHCP is broken by Debian.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *