So much this. So many address collisions when I started this job.

@devrandom Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. And I confess to you, my compañeros and to all the main devs that I have done this, but will sin no more.
(signing) In the Name of the Pasta, and of the Sauce, and of the Holy Meatballs, R'Amen.

@devrandom This is not a problem if you statically assign it at the DHCP server.

@BalooUriza very true; however, my predecessor(s) did not do this. It was so messy.

@devrandom I once inheireted a network that was very mixed between statically assigned at the clients and statically assigned in DHCP. Must have taken me two months of tracking shit down to get everything into DHCP proper. Then got laid off...

@BalooUriza ugh, I'm sorry about the lay-off. Sounds similar to here though. Servers, Workstations, wireless were all in a single subnet. That includes personal wireless devices.

Everything .20+ was in the DHCP scope which may have been okay if they didn't start assigning static IPs out of that range. And of those, only a couple had a proper reservation.

@devrandom I don't care why anybody would do that at this point. It is easy to set up DHCP to automatically manage DNS and RDNS to update automatically with DHCP. Even on static reservations, you don't want to set a long TTL. Just set the expiration time in DHCP and the TTL and DNS to the same thing.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

A bunch of technomancers in the fediverse. Keep it fairly clean please. This arcology is for all who wash up upon it's digital shore.