DHCP Server
I am retiring a windows 2003 server that is also my dhcp server. My choices for a new dhcp are my Sonic Wall router, my Synology Disk Station or a windows 2012 server that is running SQL server. Suggestions?
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Yea except then you can't incorporate the DHCP with AD DNS which eases DNS management.
What I see from you choice there is not good advise
If you going to install DHCP on Windows 2012 server it would be the best choice but since SQL server is using up to 80% or more memory it's not to good idea to install DHCP on SQL server.
If you going to use Sonic Wall you going to have limited options to control DHCP leases. You can do reservation but you need to know mac address of card you want to put to reservation scope. There is no option to export DHCP leases to txt file like you can do on Windows server.
Also if you going to use a lot of leases there is very hard or impossible to setup multiscope.
I know nothing about DHCP features on Synology Disk Station so I can;t advise.
What about your domain controller ? Do you have one ? If yes then best option would be install DHCP on DC.
If you going to install DHCP on Windows 2012 server it would be the best choice but since SQL server is using up to 80% or more memory it's not to good idea to install DHCP on SQL server.
If you going to use Sonic Wall you going to have limited options to control DHCP leases. You can do reservation but you need to know mac address of card you want to put to reservation scope. There is no option to export DHCP leases to txt file like you can do on Windows server.
Also if you going to use a lot of leases there is very hard or impossible to setup multiscope.
I know nothing about DHCP features on Synology Disk Station so I can;t advise.
What about your domain controller ? Do you have one ? If yes then best option would be install DHCP on DC.
I didn't suggest putting DHCP on the SQL server, I suggested separating the services actually. It is best to deploy DHCP to a DC, there is no problem with virtualizing SQL and a DC on the same virtual host if there is enough memory.
You can proceed with Windows 2012. You can take backup of the current DHCp server and restore it to Windows 2012. That will make your life easier. Please follow the article below to migrate DHCP server from 2003 to 2012. I have did the same and worked for me.
http://www.rebeladmin.com/2014/11/step-by-step-guide-to-migrate-dhcp-from-windows-server-2003-to-windows-server-2012-r2/
You can restrict the memory usage of SQL if required . Please follow article link below
https://community.rackspace.com/products/f/18/t/1693
http://www.rebeladmin.com/2014/11/step-by-step-guide-to-migrate-dhcp-from-windows-server-2003-to-windows-server-2012-r2/
You can restrict the memory usage of SQL if required . Please follow article link below
https://community.rackspace.com/products/f/18/t/1693
Not PCI Compliant (1 role per server) if you have to worry about that but it will work otherwise.
Scavenging would take care of the classic problem with old records, so that's not so much of a factor. Outside of that, it doesn't matter, especially in the instances of smaller networks (which is what I'm assuming here).
If you're referring to being able to handle DHCP across multiple subnets, a Sonicwall can accomplish that as well (you would just create DHCP servers for each subnet). DHCP reservations always require MAC addresses. That's exactly how DHCP works. The ability to export is an advantage for Windows, but that also assumes there are a large number of reservations, etc. (Only EagleCrusher can answer that) If there are few to no reservations, that's an issue that doesn't matter. And moving between Sonicwalls is about exporting and importing settings. Even the Synology can handle DHCP for multiple subnets, even though it would require assistance from a relay. A Sonicwall can be used to define multiple subnets and have DHCP servers for each.
That said, there is nothing wrong with using the Windows Server for DHCP, as long as it's followed the way David Jones has cited. Just because I would use the Sonicwall in your scenario doesn't mean that it's wrong to use a server, and just because the other two have cited they'd use the server doesn't mean it's wrong to use the Sonicwall. At the end of the day, it's about what works for you.
The one thing we probably mostly agree on: Don't use the Synology.
If you're referring to being able to handle DHCP across multiple subnets, a Sonicwall can accomplish that as well (you would just create DHCP servers for each subnet). DHCP reservations always require MAC addresses. That's exactly how DHCP works. The ability to export is an advantage for Windows, but that also assumes there are a large number of reservations, etc. (Only EagleCrusher can answer that) If there are few to no reservations, that's an issue that doesn't matter. And moving between Sonicwalls is about exporting and importing settings. Even the Synology can handle DHCP for multiple subnets, even though it would require assistance from a relay. A Sonicwall can be used to define multiple subnets and have DHCP servers for each.
That said, there is nothing wrong with using the Windows Server for DHCP, as long as it's followed the way David Jones has cited. Just because I would use the Sonicwall in your scenario doesn't mean that it's wrong to use a server, and just because the other two have cited they'd use the server doesn't mean it's wrong to use the Sonicwall. At the end of the day, it's about what works for you.
The one thing we probably mostly agree on: Don't use the Synology.
ASKER
Ok, I owe some clarification here. I have 2 subnets on my network joined by Fiber 10 miles apart. Each location has its own internet connection and firewall. I have my PDC at our Main office and it has DHCP on it for that subnet. Our manufacturing plant at the other end is a different subnet and the current DHCP is being hosted on a 2003 server that is just a file server. I am retiring that 2003 server and need something else to host my DHCP. I am leaning toward the sonic wall since I only have around 100 clients that need IPs at that location. I will just make my range .50 - .255 so I can use .2 - .49 for static IPs.
Except for that I would make the DHCP range .50 to .254 (.255 is broadcast address), that sounds perfectly fine.
100 clients... I would want AD integrated DNS...
ASKER
Thanks. This is what I did and it seems to be working fine.
LoL of course it will work fine, it's DHCP... You missed the integration comments though, good luck managing DNS.
ASKER
Well, all you said was that it eased DNS management and that you would want AD integration. Its like telling me leather seats are better because ......
Here is what I would try to do if I were you, but I am limited on details here.
Virtualize your 2012 Server to Hyper-V, so you can run a virtual DOMAIN Server for DHCP and also virtualize your SQL Server if at all possible so you can stay within one role per server. Make sure you do backups, I recommend multiple, like Data / Image backups. Do a manual SQL Backup and Windows Data Backups, then do a full Image that you can restore easily with dd or guymager or an imaging tool of your choice.