Networks

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Cisco's DCHP vs standalone DHCP server

0 helpful
9 replies

by ticoloco

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

We want to deploy dhcp servers to our branches but we came to a issue: use Cisco's router dhcp server or install a dedicated machine for the task.

Does anyone know about pros and cons of using cisco's implementation against a dedicated dhcp server?

Each office have between 5-20 users that share a 64k Frame-Relay line to our corporate office with telnet sessions/internet access.

Elliott

9 replies

by kevin anderson

Cisco will be an issue if/when you upgrade, or if it ever fails.

Otherwise, it will be extremely reliable, and an easy solution. You may find though, that if the enviroment needs changes, that having a standalone allows for easier changes.

Personally, I'll haul an old PC out of the back, fire up Linux, and use it for DHCP. It's cheap, easy, and if there are any problems, they will impact your DHCP, but not your router. Meaning, if some well intentioned, but poorly informed person makeschanges in one place (dhcp, for example), it won't affect the other (routing, in this case).

I would suggest a stand alone box. But I wouldn't suggest buying any new hardware to run a dhcp server.

Kev.

by gee santoz

Well,

Cisco DHCP feature is for Small connected LAN and fit the scenario that you will deploy (5-20 user). The pros using Cisco DHCP is you will never need the DHCP server on the remote LAN (even on the Head Office LAN). Also you didn't load the DHCP request & Reply traffic via WAN (FR) link. Keep in mind that if you use the Centralize DHCP server on Head Office (this is a other possible scenario), every reboot on remote user ... remote user pc will query the ip to the central DHCP server which actually add load to the FR link.

The cons using the DHCP Server feature on Cisco,
1. you have to manage several Cisco Router using DHCP server feature. You need to manually configured the Cisco to do this. Every time you change the Cisco (for some reasons) you have to reconfigure the new router to do that.
2. You can't use the DHCP Server Feature for Large number of user (well this is not fit at your scenario ... but this reason is the cons isn't it ?)

But the choice is yours, ussually it depends on the net admin which option will simplify their works.

have a nice day ;-)

by gee santoz

Well,

Cisco DHCP feature is for Small connected LAN and fit the scenario that you will deploy (5-20 user). The pros using Cisco DHCP is you will never need the DHCP server on the remote LAN (even on the Head Office LAN). Also you didn't load the DHCP request & Reply traffic via WAN (FR) link. Keep in mind that if you use the Centralize DHCP server on Head Office (this is a other possible scenario), every reboot on remote user ... remote user pc will query the ip to the central DHCP server which actually add load to the FR link.

The cons using the DHCP Server feature on Cisco,
1. you have to manage several Cisco Router using DHCP server feature. You need to manually configured the Cisco to do this. Every time you change the Cisco (for some reasons) you have to reconfigure the new router to do that.
2. You can't use the DHCP Server Feature for Large number of user (well this is not fit at your scenario ... but this reason is the cons isn't it ?)

But the choice is yours, ussually it depends on the net admin which option will simplify their works.

have a nice day ;-)

by estebandelatorre

I'm sure you are running one NT server at least in each branch. (or you can upgrade one to NT server)
Just install NT's DHCP server (and Wins) in an NT server. DHCP is not a very heavy protocol, run as a service, and all you have to have is the machine running.
It's a suitable application to install into one endususer machine without notice.

Good luck and leave Cisco for routing purposes only!

This discussion is closed to new replies.