DHCP, or Static IP?

[Xtremist]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
No, but the post I was replying to was using XP+ICS. But I'm not a fan of MS so I wouldn't use their DHCP server unless I had absolutely no other choice.

We just misunderstood each other. You replied to XP+ICS while I replied to your post, not his, indicating the 'real' Windows DHCP server is pretty reliable as is the Linux solution you use. I think you took my reply as defending whatever XP is doing to allocate IP's. Sorry for the confusion.

Personally I just let my Cisco 678 handle all my DHCP/NAT. Cheers!

 

[Nothinman]

No, I understood what you meant and I still wouldn't use MS 'real' DHCP server if I had a choice. And I don't like using those SOHO routers either because then there's no local DNS, here I have DHCP setup to update my local DNS whenever a new host gets an IP.

 

[Xtremist]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
No, I understood what you meant and I still wouldn't use MS 'real' DHCP server if I had a choice. And I don't like using those SOHO routers either because then there's no local DNS, here I have DHCP setup to update my local DNS whenever a new host gets an IP.

Again I must've misunderstood you. I thought by asking me if I was talking about the "mini-DHCP server built into XP" you thought I was talking about the "mini-DHCP server built into XP" not the Windows Server DHCP service. I apologize.

As far a the SOHO routers go, that's fine. I don't utilize DNS internally personally and just do port-fowarding externally so external DNS is fairly straigh-forward. I guess for the person that needs to do NAT, DHCP, and local DNS... your solution would work pretty nicely.

 

[Nothinman]

No, actually my "The mini-DHCP server built into XP?" question was really a rhetorical remark meant to point out that we were talking about XP+ICS and not a Windows Server installation which is what yo umeant.

 

[Xtremist]

And my last response was supposed to be sarcastic. Much is lost without audio/video representation. Being half-sarcastic, I thought this thread was a discussion about static vs. DHCP and people giving advise as to various options shminu could consider. One person mentions XP+ICS, another mentions Linux, and another mentions Windows Server DHCP. I was simply trying to assert that Windows is capable of handling DHCP.

At any rate, we all use what works for us!

 

[gunrunnerjohn]

I confess, I never even thought of ICS, that's such an abortion that I rarely even discuss it.

 

[Nothinman]

I hope you meant abhoration...

At any rate, we all use what works for us!

And what we can afford and for most of us, paying for Windows Server is pretty much a waste with all the free, and better IMO, alternatives.

 

[Xtremist]

Or abomination, hehe.

Free is definately why I use my Cisco for DHCP. I don't think anyone in their right mind would realistically deploy a Windows server solely for DHCP so yeah it's not a viable alternative if that's all you're doing.