dhcp 600 addresses

am trying to use dhcp for the first time on our 2k server network.  i need about 600 addresses. at the moment i've created 3 scopes each containing 200 addresses. one on each domain controller.

is this the best way of doing it?

when the first dhcp server has allocated all its addresses, will new requests automatically be passed to the next dhcp server?

LVL 3
browolfAsked:
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

mikeleebrlaCommented:
i cleaner way would be to create one scope with all 600 addresses.  Unless you have a specific reason for needing three scopes (such as they will use a different gateway or dns server) i would just use one large scope,,,, it will make it easier to manage.
0
browolfAuthor Commented:
I dont want all the computers to rely on 1 server, that's why i've got 3 scopes.
0
mikeleebrlaCommented:
Browolf,,, do you have 3 DHCP scopes or 3 DHCP servers???  you only mentioned 3 DHCP scopes in your post which indicates 3 scopes on one server, which gives you no DHCP redundancy.
0
Cloud Class® Course: C++ 11 Fundamentals

This course will introduce you to C++ 11 and teach you about syntax fundamentals.

browolfAuthor Commented:
i did say "one on each domain controller" ie 3 dhcp servers with a scope each
0
mikeleebrlaCommented:
my bad i missed that.... well to answer your question yes when one scope runs out of addresses  the other should give out dhcp addresses from its own scope.... the way dhcp works is the client sends a broadcast looking for any dhcp server to respond, the first one responds is the server that the client will get the address from.  Since you are worried about redundancy and fault tolerance i would make your scopes much bigger though (big enough that all your clients could get addresses from one DHCP server if the other 2 were down).  I'm you are giving out private addresses so they are free, so why not make the scopes bigger?  it wouldn't hurt anything, and would only help you.
0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
browolfAuthor Commented:
good point.  thanks. you've answered my questions
0
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Windows 2000

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.

Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.