"Bill Vermillion" <bv@wjv.comREMOVE> wrote in message
news:HvrnDG.1vDy@wjv.com...
> In article <2op570hbtj53svg2u11jjd7b85e86vbk1l@4ax.com>,
> Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>
> >Well, if it's currently set for DHCP, are you sure that it has the
> >right address? My nightmare was having multiple DHCP servers running
> >on a LAN.
>
> Years ago I was at a tradeshow - maybe ISPcon. An annoucment came
> over the house system asking for all booth vendors to check their
> machines to make sure there was no DHCP running.
>
> The 'network provider for the convention used DHCP, and at leat 1
> rogue DCHP server on the show floor was issuing IPs that went
> nowhere. The 'simplicity' of DHPC can surely cause problems.
> Personally I can only see it's use when you have far more machine
> than available addresses and only a percentage are going to be on
> line at any one time. It's my anal nature.

We use static-assigned DHCP for all PC's and print-servers.

The idea being if we need to migrate to a different IP subnet (we have to
from time to time), it's fairly easy.

As we run Samba for Wins and a local DNS server, everything should be
fairly dynamic for changes.

It also means that it's easier to configure new equpitment, as you just
plug it in, and it's got an address.

bkx