> Why the heck would you have two DHCP servers on your network? Solve this<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
> problem first.<br>
<br>
Hehe, I knew that question would get asked. The reason was because I<br>
was out of town for a period when the BE server went down in a lengthy<br>
power cut and didn't turn on when power was restored as it is<br>
configured to do. So for a period of time I was away, the rest of the<br>
family was stuck without internet access (which seems to have annoyed<br>
them a lot). It is possible to configure dhcp3-server in a<br>
primary/secondary configuration, but the modem obviously doesn't<br>
support that through the user GUI. Now I have a raspberry Pi, I might<br>
configure that as a backup secondary DHCP server and eliminate the<br>
modem as a server.<br>
<br>
><br>
> I remember mythtv didn't play nice when the HDHR IP address changes while<br>
> mythbackend is still running. My situation was that mythbackend started up<br>
> prior to the HDHR obtaining a DHCP, so strangeness would happen. I had to<br>
> modify the init scripts to wait for the HDHR networking to stabilize before<br>
> mythbackend starting. However, this was several months back using 0.24. I<br>
> am not sure if any recent changes went into this area.<br>
><br>
<br>
So, it seems like it is possible that the IP changed after the backend<br>
made a connection to it. Getting rid of the rogue DHCP server should<br>
resolve the problem.<br>
<br>
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Ben Kamen <<a href="mailto:bkamen@benjammin.net">bkamen@benjammin.net</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Which bring up another good point - "infrastructure" should not be on<br>
> changing IP's. It's ok to use DHCP to configure them on boot, but things<br>
> like all my manages switches and WAP's and HDHR are on assigned static<br>
> addresses in DHCP<br>
<br>
I agree. My server statically assigns IP addresses to all of my<br>
'infrastructure'...so long as the modem doesn't interfere!<br>
<br>
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:19 AM, Joseph Fry <<a href="mailto:joe@thefrys.com">joe@thefrys.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> What I don't understand is why your Cable Modem is on the same network<br>
> segment as your HDHR or PC's? You don't have some sort of router/gateway<br>
> device?<br>
<br>
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Mike Perkins<br>
<<a href="mailto:mikep@randomtraveller.org.uk">mikep@randomtraveller.org.uk</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Or... firewall?<br>
<br>
It is an ADSL modem that also does NAT and routing etc. (<br>
<a href="http://homesupport.cisco.com/en-us/support/gateways/AM300" target="_blank">http://homesupport.cisco.com/en-us/support/gateways/AM300</a> ) I am no<br>
network guru, but I believe this gives me adequate security. Only a<br>
couple of ports are exposed on the WAN side. Any other inbound<br>
traffic should get dropped.<br>
<br>
Confirmation of my networking assumptions would be greatly<br>
appreciated, since I don't want to expose myself, my family, or my<br>
data, unnecessarily.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>You should be fine... that device is a gateway and DSL modem in one, and I'm sure it does firewall the connection to a degree.</div><div><br></div><div>But I would eliminate a DHCP server. I generally stick to using the one in my gateway for exactly the reasons you describe... sure it's a single point of failure, but I keep an older backup on hand just in case it fails. Of course I use DD-WRT on mine, so I have full control over the DHCP server.</div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div></div>