Is pfSense DHCP Server NON RFC Compliant



  • I have a Mikrotik CSS326-24G-2S+RM switch, and I had an issue where the DHCP leases were not getting through. I disabled DHCP things on the switch:

    Namely I disabled the add information option on the switch:
    ef182c16-b9ab-42c5-a834-acad44c348f5-image.png

    To get clients to get DHCP requests through the switch.

    I contacted Mikrotik, and asked them what the deal was. They focused on another issue I was having, being that the switch itself could not get a DHCP address.

    I asked them close to 11 months later if there was a fix, and this is their response:

    We have attempted to fix pfSense DHCP server issue in SwOS v2.8:
    *) make DHCP client work with RFC non compliant DHCP servers
    
    But we would recommend upgrading to the latest SwOS v2.9 which contains even more fixes regarding DHCP.
    

    I asked them again what they found and:

    The change makes SwOS DHCP Client to also accept DHCP offers with set dst. address (non broadcast one).
    

    I did not read the DHCP RFC, but does any of this make it sound like pfSense is DHCP RFC non compliant?



  • Well ..... where to start ?

    What about : did you check 'who' it is ?

    [2.4.4-RELEASE][root@priv.brit-hotel-fumel.net]/root:  /usr/local/sbin/dhcpd -v
    Internet Systems Consortium DHCP Server 4.3.6-P1
    Copyright 2004-2018 Internet Systems Consortium.
    All rights reserved
    ......
    

    So, there you have it :
    Bring " Internet Systems Consortium DHCP Server " to the net and you find out who makes it.

    Changes are good that "Microtick" itself uses exactly the same software.

    Another way to resolute your issue : take that box labelled "Microtick" out of your network and you wind up having a network that will give an IP (DNS Gateway, what ever you want) to any device on planet earth.
    Problem solved.



  • @Gertjan Right, and that is what I thought.

    I just noticed that they wrote that, and I know they are not giving me the right answer.


  • LAYER 8 Global Moderator

    Is that switch the ones that has ANY for all vlans? Dude save yourself a whole lot of pain and just go get real switch...



  • Hey Guys,

    With all respect, I asked a question, and it was answered. All I want to know is if MikroTik support was bullsh*ting me. They are, and I figured this. Not in my wildest dreams would I think that (considering the software set that pfSense uses), that pfSense would not have an RFC complaint DHCP server, but I wanted to ask the experts.

    I have no issue, but I wanted to confirm what I was hearing was not the truth.

    Over the last two years MikroTik has been very good to me, and I challenge you to find a switch with 10gb SFP+ at the price-point these things come in at.

    For the record, VLANing works 100%, and they have quite a few features I like. They are missing some things that I would use in different scenerious, but for what they are, I am good.

    The switch that I am using is a CSS varient, so limited control of just the switch, but they sell CRS versions that are pretty heavy handed, and you can switch to the RouterOS, and SwitchOS.

    I wish they would opensource both, I think it would be a win for all.

    Like I said though, I can't beat the SFP+ stuff, and I mainly use these in places where I need that 10gbit run. I just grabbed their CRS305-1G-4S+IN 4x SFP+ switch for the 10gbit stuff too.

    Amazon lists after market SFP+ adapters too that work great too: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01LYW5F11/

    I do not have a heavy handed budget for this stuff, and if I did, I would grab something that may be a bit better, but so far so good.



  • @webdawg said in Is pfSense DHCP Server NON RFC Compliant:

    Over the last two years MikroTik has been very good to me

    For what it's worth, I also use Mikrotik at home, and our ISP uses them for their business customers. At my company, I have pfSense connecting my LAN to my ISP's Mikrotik. While I've been satisfied with the hardware and RouterOS, I'm a little disappointed that their support is not being straight-forward with you.


Log in to reply