I
Inverted Prophecy
Gentlemen,
We are in the middle of an IP renumbering plan, and came across the
following problem. All peripherals are put into a separate subnet,
like this:
......
32 - 127: printers
128 - 159: scanners
......
All IP adresses are provided by DHCP. I would like to create a
separate scope for each group of peripherals (such as 10.89.64.32-127
/24, 10.89.64.128-159 /24 etc.), but this gives me the error "The
address range and mask conflit with an existing scope." That is indeed
true, but I would like DHCP to look at the fourth octet, which isn't
overlapping at all. All groups are mutually exclusive!!
Is is possible to circumvent this problem? I'm not looking for dirty
hacks, just supported solutions
. Before I blame Microsoft, is this
RFC-compliant behaviour?
Any hints would be more than welcome,
Casper.
We are in the middle of an IP renumbering plan, and came across the
following problem. All peripherals are put into a separate subnet,
like this:
......
32 - 127: printers
128 - 159: scanners
......
All IP adresses are provided by DHCP. I would like to create a
separate scope for each group of peripherals (such as 10.89.64.32-127
/24, 10.89.64.128-159 /24 etc.), but this gives me the error "The
address range and mask conflit with an existing scope." That is indeed
true, but I would like DHCP to look at the fourth octet, which isn't
overlapping at all. All groups are mutually exclusive!!
Is is possible to circumvent this problem? I'm not looking for dirty
hacks, just supported solutions
. Before I blame Microsoft, is thisRFC-compliant behaviour?
Any hints would be more than welcome,
Casper.