Re: [SOLVED] Re: Migrating Debian installation to a new motherboard
- Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2018 10:25:37 -0500
- From: David Wright <deblis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [SOLVED] Re: Migrating Debian installation to a new motherboard
On Fri 02 Nov 2018 at 23:09:02 (-0700), David Christensen wrote:
> On 11/2/18 8:49 PM, David Wright wrote:
> > On Fri 02 Nov 2018 at 20:11:03 (-0700), David Christensen wrote:
> > > On 11/2/18 6:24 PM, David Wright wrote:
> > > > On Fri 02 Nov 2018 at 07:05:16 (-0400), Michael Stone wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 10:12:36PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > > > > BTW in a network set up like my own, the place where the MAC would be
> > > > > > relevant is in the DHCP server (here, the router) because that is how
> > > > > > the IP number is assigned. An unassigned MAC will get given an IP
> > > > > > address 192.168.1.200+, and it will conect to the Internet, but other
> > > > > > machines on the LAN would not recognise it. (Although the router can
> > > > > > hand out IP numbers, it doesn't run a nameserver.)
> > > > >
> > > > > If you do something strange on your network, the assumption is that
> > > > > you're responsible for updating it for new machines. It's not
> > > > > something that needs to be in a general guide.
> > > >
> > > > I agree with that sentiment. But what is strange about my setup?
> > > > Perhaps you can help me find a less idiosyncratic way.
> > > >
> > > > Condition #1: All devices at home must be addressable by name.
> > > > Condition #2: Several devices cannot have a static IP address assigned.
> > > > For example, this PC is 192.168.1.17 at home. Currently it is 172.20.5.105;
> > > > last night it was 10.0.27.15.
> > > >
> > > > So at home, all the IP addresses are assigned by the router using the
> > > > devices' MACs. The computers use /etc/hosts to look up other devices.
> > > > The non-"computers" use the router's IP address for their configuration.
> > > >
> > > > What would you change?
> > >
> > > Buy or build a router with a caching name server that integrates with
> > > the DHCP server. Configure the LAN devices to use DHCP. Set DHCP
> > > fixed leases on the router for devices that require a static IP.
> > You misunderstood my question. I'm meant to have done something
> > "strange" with my network and wanted to know how to "rectify" the
> > situation, not how to throw cash at it.
> > BTW all the devices are currently configured using DHCP; that's what
> > I meant by "assigned by the router".
> What is strange is that your router does not have a caching name
> server that integrates with the DHCP server.
Eh? None of the consumer-grade routers that I've run have had any DNS
server, but they have all had a DHCP service.
> This is a common and
> useful feature.
… which you pay for with a more expensive device.
> Not having it forces work-around's like putting LAN
> host IP's into the /etc/hosts files of every other LAN host, which is
> a PITA to maintain.
It might be for you. Propogating it from my master copy is trivial
(with the right scripts), and updating it is hardly onerous when there
are fewer than two changes per year over the last five years.
> Alternatively, implement your own integrated DHCP
> server and caching DNS server.
> Low-cost solutions include:
> 1. Router appliance -- re-flashing the firmware with a FOSS firmware
> distribution like DD-WRT.
> 2. Home-brew router using a PC -- installing a second NIC and a Linux
> or BSD router distribution like IPCop or pfSense.
So the general opinion held around here is that it's "strange" not to
adopt one of these solutions on a home LAN. Really?
> I tried the former on an older Netgear device and it worked. But when
> I later tried to flash an upgrade, I bricked it.
Great, just what I want to do. Not.
> I ran home-brew PC routers for years. This approach gives you the
> most control, and pfSense rocks. But, I burned up a lot of energy,
> made a lot of noise, and generated a lot of heat. Unfortunately, ITX
> PC's with dual NIC's are too expensive.
Fine if someone else is paying the electricity and AC bills.
> So, I researched commercial products, asked around on Linux and BSD
> lists, and bought Ubiquiti Networks UniFi stuff:
> I run the UniFi SDN Controller server on Debian:
Most of the eye-watering prices have 3 or 4 figures. Wouldn't it be
"strange" to be running this enterprise-grade kit on a home LAN?
> What do you mean by "The non-"computers" use the router's IP address
> for their configuration"?
The wireless ones need the SSID and PSK but the wired ones are
directly or indirectly connected to the router. However, the printer
(using WiFi) tries to set up some sort of ad hoc networking which
screws things up. IIRC (I'm not at home) I have to point it at the
router's address in some way. But these things are never well
documented; you're either meant to follow instructions on a tiny
display or be using some Windows or Mac software.