Question on Transcender Question :-)

Discussion in 'MCSE' started by eddiec, Apr 16, 2004.

  1. eddiec

    eddiec Guest

    I have a Win2K3 AD design transcender question in which you have two LANs
    connected by a WAN link. A requirement of the DHCP implementation is to
    provide redundancy in case of the failure of one server.

    Two possibile answers are:

    b) - Install a DHCP server in each office. On each server configure a single
    scope and an exclusion range.
    d) - Install a DHCP server in each office. On each server configure two
    scopes, for each scope configure an exclusion range.

    The recommended answer is (d). I do not understand this answer.

    Let's say that I have two subnets:

    LAN1 - 10.0.15.0/24
    LAN2 - 10.0.16.0/24

    connected by a WAN link.

    The DHCP server on LAN1 is set up to service DHCP requests from LAN2 as well
    as LAN1. Fine. But how will it know not to assign LAN2 IP addresses to local
    computers. If it does that the local computer will belong to the wrong
    subnet and will not be able to access any local resources?

    TIA

    eddiec :)
     
    eddiec, Apr 16, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. eddiec

    Darth 2000 Guest

    Any relation to EddiePok/EddieRox?

    --
    ---------------
    Darth 2000 - MCNGP # 0001 1100
    Says: Be gone you vermin!



    "eddiec" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I have a Win2K3 AD design transcender question in which you have two LANs
    > connected by a WAN link. A requirement of the DHCP implementation is to
    > provide redundancy in case of the failure of one server.
    >
    > Two possibile answers are:
    >
    > b) - Install a DHCP server in each office. On each server configure a

    single
    > scope and an exclusion range.
    > d) - Install a DHCP server in each office. On each server configure two
    > scopes, for each scope configure an exclusion range.
    >
    > The recommended answer is (d). I do not understand this answer.
    >
    > Let's say that I have two subnets:
    >
    > LAN1 - 10.0.15.0/24
    > LAN2 - 10.0.16.0/24
    >
    > connected by a WAN link.
    >
    > The DHCP server on LAN1 is set up to service DHCP requests from LAN2 as

    well
    > as LAN1. Fine. But how will it know not to assign LAN2 IP addresses to

    local
    > computers. If it does that the local computer will belong to the wrong
    > subnet and will not be able to access any local resources?
    >
    > TIA
    >
    > eddiec :)
    >
    >
     
    Darth 2000, Apr 16, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 16:30:00 +1000, "eddiec" <>
    wrote:

    >I have a Win2K3 AD design transcender question in which you have two LANs
    >connected by a WAN link. A requirement of the DHCP implementation is to
    >provide redundancy in case of the failure of one server.
    >
    >Two possibile answers are:
    >
    >b) - Install a DHCP server in each office. On each server configure a single
    >scope and an exclusion range.
    >d) - Install a DHCP server in each office. On each server configure two
    >scopes, for each scope configure an exclusion range.
    >
    >The recommended answer is (d). I do not understand this answer.
    >
    >Let's say that I have two subnets:
    >
    >LAN1 - 10.0.15.0/24
    >LAN2 - 10.0.16.0/24
    >
    >connected by a WAN link.
    >
    >The DHCP server on LAN1 is set up to service DHCP requests from LAN2 as well
    >as LAN1. Fine. But how will it know not to assign LAN2 IP addresses to local
    >computers. If it does that the local computer will belong to the wrong
    >subnet and will not be able to access any local resources?
    >
    >TIA
    >
    >eddiec :)
    >



    This is the age-old eighty-twenty rule in action

    two subnets, two dhcp servers.
    Server on Subnet A
    subnet A 80% of address range
    subnet B 20% of address range

    Server on Subnet B
    subnet B 80% of address range
    subnet A 20% of address range

    Which means that if one server is down the other can temporarily issue
    new leases to give you time to recover - in reality this means a 4
    hour window to an 8 hour window to get things fixed with minimised
    impact on your environment.

    Your question on what addresses get assigned to which subnet is a good
    one. If your router is bootp/rfc1542 compliant then the discover
    broadcast from the other subnet will arrive at the dhcp server tagged
    with that fact in its header and the dhcp server will issue an address
    based on the route it took to get to the dhcp server.

    This means that server on subnet B *can* issue addresses for subnet A
    because the DORA has the correct tag information from the Subnet A
    interface of the router. Clever eh!!?


    ================================
    My Hero:
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/30/index.html
    (remove vroomfondle to email me)
    ================================
     
    Marlin Munrow, Apr 16, 2004
    #3
  4. eddiec

    Julian Guest

    Nice Info

    "Marlin Munrow" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 16:30:00 +1000, "eddiec" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >I have a Win2K3 AD design transcender question in which you have two LANs
    > >connected by a WAN link. A requirement of the DHCP implementation is to
    > >provide redundancy in case of the failure of one server.
    > >
    > >Two possibile answers are:
    > >
    > >b) - Install a DHCP server in each office. On each server configure a

    single
    > >scope and an exclusion range.
    > >d) - Install a DHCP server in each office. On each server configure two
    > >scopes, for each scope configure an exclusion range.
    > >
    > >The recommended answer is (d). I do not understand this answer.
    > >
    > >Let's say that I have two subnets:
    > >
    > >LAN1 - 10.0.15.0/24
    > >LAN2 - 10.0.16.0/24
    > >
    > >connected by a WAN link.
    > >
    > >The DHCP server on LAN1 is set up to service DHCP requests from LAN2 as

    well
    > >as LAN1. Fine. But how will it know not to assign LAN2 IP addresses to

    local
    > >computers. If it does that the local computer will belong to the wrong
    > >subnet and will not be able to access any local resources?
    > >
    > >TIA
    > >
    > >eddiec :)
    > >

    >
    >
    > This is the age-old eighty-twenty rule in action
    >
    > two subnets, two dhcp servers.
    > Server on Subnet A
    > subnet A 80% of address range
    > subnet B 20% of address range
    >
    > Server on Subnet B
    > subnet B 80% of address range
    > subnet A 20% of address range
    >
    > Which means that if one server is down the other can temporarily issue
    > new leases to give you time to recover - in reality this means a 4
    > hour window to an 8 hour window to get things fixed with minimised
    > impact on your environment.
    >
    > Your question on what addresses get assigned to which subnet is a good
    > one. If your router is bootp/rfc1542 compliant then the discover
    > broadcast from the other subnet will arrive at the dhcp server tagged
    > with that fact in its header and the dhcp server will issue an address
    > based on the route it took to get to the dhcp server.
    >
    > This means that server on subnet B *can* issue addresses for subnet A
    > because the DORA has the correct tag information from the Subnet A
    > interface of the router. Clever eh!!?
    >
    >
    > ================================
    > My Hero:
    > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/30/index.html
    > (remove vroomfondle to email me)
    > ================================
     
    Julian, Apr 18, 2004
    #4
  5. eddiec

    zenner Guest

    Look at it from the other direction...why would you want local clients to
    get IP assignments over the links, from a distant source?

    It is much more logical to have local assignment of IP addresses. Cuts down
    on delay, overhead, frees up bandwidth...

    I can't believe that Transcender did not give a very lucid explanation to
    the question. Are you real sure you read it and looked up the references?
    You can't just use the simulation as a sole training aid. If you are really
    confused, Transcender does offer a help line/email contact.

    PS. Cross posting is usually discouraged. Instead of generating one thread,
    you are generating x times the number of post, plus those replies. It
    appears that Usenet bandwidth (traffic conservation) is a thing of the past,
    as are many other courtesies

    "Julian" <> wrote in message
    news:Wwvgc.717$...
    > Nice Info
    >
    > "Marlin Munrow" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 16:30:00 +1000, "eddiec" <>
    > > wrote:
    > >
    > > >I have a Win2K3 AD design transcender question in which you have two

    LANs
    > > >connected by a WAN link. A requirement of the DHCP implementation is to
    > > >provide redundancy in case of the failure of one server.
    > > >
    > > >Two possibile answers are:
    > > >
    > > >b) - Install a DHCP server in each office. On each server configure a

    > single
    > > >scope and an exclusion range.
    > > >d) - Install a DHCP server in each office. On each server configure two
    > > >scopes, for each scope configure an exclusion range.
    > > >
    > > >The recommended answer is (d). I do not understand this answer.
    > > >
    > > >Let's say that I have two subnets:
    > > >
    > > >LAN1 - 10.0.15.0/24
    > > >LAN2 - 10.0.16.0/24
    > > >
    > > >connected by a WAN link.
    > > >
    > > >The DHCP server on LAN1 is set up to service DHCP requests from LAN2 as

    > well
    > > >as LAN1. Fine. But how will it know not to assign LAN2 IP addresses to

    > local
    > > >computers. If it does that the local computer will belong to the wrong
    > > >subnet and will not be able to access any local resources?
    > > >
    > > >TIA
    > > >
    > > >eddiec :)
    > > >

    > >
    > >
    > > This is the age-old eighty-twenty rule in action
    > >
    > > two subnets, two dhcp servers.
    > > Server on Subnet A
    > > subnet A 80% of address range
    > > subnet B 20% of address range
    > >
    > > Server on Subnet B
    > > subnet B 80% of address range
    > > subnet A 20% of address range
    > >
    > > Which means that if one server is down the other can temporarily issue
    > > new leases to give you time to recover - in reality this means a 4
    > > hour window to an 8 hour window to get things fixed with minimised
    > > impact on your environment.
    > >
    > > Your question on what addresses get assigned to which subnet is a good
    > > one. If your router is bootp/rfc1542 compliant then the discover
    > > broadcast from the other subnet will arrive at the dhcp server tagged
    > > with that fact in its header and the dhcp server will issue an address
    > > based on the route it took to get to the dhcp server.
    > >
    > > This means that server on subnet B *can* issue addresses for subnet A
    > > because the DORA has the correct tag information from the Subnet A
    > > interface of the router. Clever eh!!?
    > >
    > >
    > > ================================
    > > My Hero:
    > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/30/index.html
    > > (remove vroomfondle to email me)
    > > ================================

    >
    >



    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 4/15/2004
     
    zenner, Apr 18, 2004
    #5
  6. eddiec

    Pieter Guest

    > Look at it from the other direction...why would you want local clients to
    > get IP assignments over the links, from a distant source?
    >
    > It is much more logical to have local assignment of IP addresses. Cuts

    down
    > on delay, overhead, frees up bandwidth...
    >
    >
    > PS. Cross posting is usually discouraged. Instead of generating one

    thread,
    > you are generating x times the number of post, plus those replies. It
    > appears that Usenet bandwidth (traffic conservation) is a thing of the

    past,
    > as are many other courtesies
    >
    > "Julian" <> wrote in message
    > news:Wwvgc.717$...
    > > Nice Info
    > >



    > > > >I have a Win2K3 AD design transcender question in which you have two

    > LANs
    > > > >connected by a WAN link. A requirement of the DHCP implementation is

    to
    > > > >provide redundancy in case of the failure of one server.
    > > > >


    In general, you're right: IP addresses should be obtained locally as much as
    possible. The answer however lays in the question: you have to provide
    redundancy. In other words: you will set up the DHCP servers as described in
    answer D. As a result, computers will get their IP addresses locally, until
    that server fails or runs out of addresses.

    Best regards,
    Pieter

    P.s.: one of the courtesies you are talking about is not replying at the top
    of a posting, but at the bottom. Another one is quoting: deleting the parts
    of the message you are responding to that are not relevant. :)
     
    Pieter, Apr 24, 2004
    #6
  7. eddiec

    Zenner Guest

    I had to think about that. Since a large number of people do "top post" as
    you call it...

    I don't think you are right. If you read the original post (and subsequent
    replies) top posting allows you to read the reply without going through the
    entire history in each and every message. What you may be thinking about is
    "snipping" ... truncating the original message and/or previous replies.

    I hope you are not advocating cross posting?

    "Pieter" <> wrote in message
    news:408a54ae$0$10312$...
    > > Look at it from the other direction...why would you want local clients

    to
    > > get IP assignments over the links, from a distant source?
    > >
    > > It is much more logical to have local assignment of IP addresses. Cuts

    > down
    > > on delay, overhead, frees up bandwidth...
    > >
    > >
    > > PS. Cross posting is usually discouraged. Instead of generating one

    > thread,
    > > you are generating x times the number of post, plus those replies. It
    > > appears that Usenet bandwidth (traffic conservation) is a thing of the

    > past,
    > > as are many other courtesies
    > >
    > > "Julian" <> wrote in message
    > > news:Wwvgc.717$...
    > > > Nice Info
    > > >

    >
    >
    > > > > >I have a Win2K3 AD design transcender question in which you have

    two
    > > LANs
    > > > > >connected by a WAN link. A requirement of the DHCP implementation

    is
    > to
    > > > > >provide redundancy in case of the failure of one server.
    > > > > >

    >
    > In general, you're right: IP addresses should be obtained locally as much

    as
    > possible. The answer however lays in the question: you have to provide
    > redundancy. In other words: you will set up the DHCP servers as described

    in
    > answer D. As a result, computers will get their IP addresses locally,

    until
    > that server fails or runs out of addresses.
    >
    > Best regards,
    > Pieter
    >
    > P.s.: one of the courtesies you are talking about is not replying at the

    top
    > of a posting, but at the bottom. Another one is quoting: deleting the

    parts
    > of the message you are responding to that are not relevant. :)
    >
    >
    >



    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.688 / Virus Database: 449 - Release Date: 5/19/2004
     
    Zenner, May 20, 2004
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Scott

    Transcender VBT ????

    Scott, Oct 15, 2003, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    666
    Scott
    Oct 15, 2003
  2. Joel Eusebio

    Transcender ManageCert 5.0

    Joel Eusebio, Nov 25, 2003, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    555
    Lorne Smith
    Nov 26, 2003
  3. John

    Hacking Transcender

    John, Aug 17, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,340
    Mark Fugatt [MVP]
    Aug 17, 2004
  4. josh
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,530
  5. SCOTTYCAMERON

    Transcender Question Please Help

    SCOTTYCAMERON, May 25, 2005, in forum: MCSA
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    440
    socaldub
    May 27, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page