Client cannot get the ip adddress from static mapping
-
Good day, I have an issue on pfSense 2.2.4 in DCHP Static Mappings.
whenever i add static mapping from dhcp leases, i get this error:
"For info, please visit https://www.isc.org/software/dhcp/
Wrote 0 deleted host decls to leases file.
Wrote 0 new dynamic host decls to leases file.
Wrote 82 leases to leases file.
Listening on BPF/re0/<re0_mac_add>/10.0.0.0/8
Sending on BPF/re0/<re0_mac_add>/10.0.0.0/8
Can't bind to dhcp address: Address already in use
Please make sure there is no other dhcp server
running and that there's no entry for dhcp or
bootp in /etc/inetd.conf. Also make sure you
are not running HP JetAdmin software, which
includes a bootp server."newly added clients can't receive their new ip address
any work arounds? i did reinstalling pfSense then restore the config but its still there.</re0_mac_add></re0_mac_add>
-
Well, are you running another DHCP server on your network?
Do you have any HP JetAdmin software which might be running a bootp server?
Is the static entry you're putting in falling within a non-static DHCP range?
How big is your DHCP range? Could it be so wide that it's coming across static addresses elsewhere on your network? -
Well, are you running another DHCP server on your network?
Do you have any HP JetAdmin software which might be running a bootp server?
Is the static entry you're putting in falling within a non-static DHCP range?
How big is your DHCP range? Could it be so wide that it's coming across static addresses elsewhere on your network?another dhcp server? none.
jetadmin? none
static entry in dhcp range? pfsense doesnt allow to do that
how big dhcp range? 10.10.1.1 to 10.10.2.254 (10.0.0.0/8) -
Just out of interest, have you tried disabling DHCP on your PFS and starting a client on your LAN to see if somehow another device may be doling out DHCP addresses?
Have you also thought about making your internal network a little less large, maybe using a /16 netmask? Or are you really going to need to run over 16 million hosts on your LAN?
What IP are you using for your firewalls LAN address?
Lastly, can you post a complete screenshot of your DHCP settings?
-
Just out of interest, have you tried disabling DHCP on your PFS and starting a client on your LAN to see if somehow another device may be doling out DHCP addresses?
Have you also thought about making your internal network a little less large, maybe using a /16 netmask? Or are you really going to need to run over 16 million hosts on your LAN?
What IP are you using for your firewalls LAN address?
Lastly, can you post a complete screenshot of your DHCP settings?
I really tried disabling DHCP and see if the client get an address, but none. I can see the DHCP logs if there's persistent "wrong network" but none.
That's my next move also, making it less hosts to troubleshoot.
10.0.0.1 - pfsense
10.1.x.x- servers
10.3.x.x-ip cams
10.5.x.x-static mappings
10.10.1.x to 10.10.2.x - DHCP range (but im using captive portal for device registration)
10.20.x.x-VoIP
-
Ok, so do you have any packages installed on the firewall or have any other services which might be using the DHCP port? Do you have any DHCP service running on the OTP1 interface?
-
Ok, so do you have any packages installed on the firewall or have any other services which might be using the DHCP port? Do you have any DHCP service running on the OTP1 interface?
Attached image shows packages installed.
Only the LAN interface has the DHCP server. THE OPT1 has no DHCP server
Sorry for late response to this topic
-
Good day,
I upgraded to 2.2.5 hoping for fix but still not working. I adjusted to 10.0.0.0/11 for less range.
Any workarounds?
-
Its been a while, im testing this workaround.
I should STOP then START the DHCP service to work.
I wonder why RESTART service doesn't solve the problem.
Anyways it is working now. Thanks to those who replied here.
-
really a /11 – how many freaking devices do you have??? There is NO freaking reason you would want or need a /11 broadcast domain.. You have like 2 million machines?? And you want them all on the same broadcast domain??
There was some thread recently where someone mentioned that large scopes use up more memory or something.. Really come on adjust your scope to a reasonable size.. To be honest I would never ever put more than a /23 on the same broadcast domain..
If you want your different types of devices on different address schemes, then do that by putting them on their own vlan.... That way you can actually firewall between them...
-
really a /11 – how many freaking devices do you have??? There is NO freaking reason you would want or need a /11 broadcast domain.. You have like 2 million machines?? And you want them all on the same broadcast domain??
that's problem here (in my workplace) the devices are added time to time. so i need to categorize them by 10.nn.x.xxx,
im aware of that. in the future we will adjust that.There was some thread recently where someone mentioned that large scopes use up more memory or something.. Really come on adjust your scope to a reasonable size.. To be honest I would never ever put more than a /23 on the same broadcast domain..
Luckilly i have no problems with the memory.
If you want your different types of devices on different address schemes, then do that by putting them on their own vlan…. That way you can actually firewall between them...yes sir, that's the next phase. but this is the best thing we can do for now. thank you
-
"so i need to categorize them by 10.nn.x.xxx,"
How many machines do you have total? Why can not vlan them now?? Once you determined that they should separate devices based upon function or location or dept, etc.. its time to segment your machine into networks/vlans not just different ip ranges in the same scope..
-
"so i need to categorize them by 10.nn.x.xxx,"
How many machines do you have total? Why can not vlan them now?? Once you determined that they should separate devices based upon function or location or dept, etc.. its time to segment your machine into networks/vlans not just different ip ranges in the same scope..
300 plus and counting. we're about to rearrange the network next year, we haven't receive the switches yet :D
