Sure, I can understand DHCP on a network of 200 machines, but she was talking about an internal network of 4 computers! On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Janina Sajka wrote: > You're correct, Jim, static is better. Only if you have many > machines coming and going is dhcp an improvement. > > On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 jwantz at hpcc2.hpcc.noaa.gov wrote: > > > Yes, Janina that is why I suggested she use ifconfig and route for her > > static stuff. I'm not sure why anybody would want to use dhcp on the > > inside of a network (unless the machines inside are WINDOWS).On Sun, 30 > > Jun 2002, Janina Sajka wrote: > > > > > I may be wrong about this, but I think those Red Hat utilities > > > only work for one card and simple setups. When you move to two > > > nics and ip forwarding/masquerading, you leave simple behind and > > > the scripts won't help you anymore. After all, Linux is very > > > powerful on networking, and the scripts aren't designed to cover > > > all circumstances, only the basics for newbies and technophobes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Speakup mailing list > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > >
