Re: [Ltsp-discuss] dhcp pool for anonymeous clients

[Keld S. <ke...@dk...>]

On Wed, May 08, 2002 at 07:28:24PM +0200, Wolfgang Schweer wrote:
> On Wed, 8 May 2002, Ragnar Wisløff wrote:
> 
> > > The (dynamic) ip addresses in the range statement must not
> > > overlap
> > > the range for fixed ones.
> > >
> >
> > I'm curious about this. The only thing you forsake doing this is the
> > ability to configure each ws separately?
> 
> Ragnar,
> 
> that should only show the possibility of the range statement.
> In case you have a net with ltsp clients and you have to provide access
> for non ltsp clients as well.
> I don't know if it matched Keld's problem or if I misunderstood.

My problem was to both have ltsp workstations, and workstations
with a whole system that just wanted a network address. 

I now set it up so that the anonymeous systems actually get
the information to download the ltsp kernel if they want.
My understanding is that normal Windows workstations or linux
workstations asking for a dhcp address would not engage into
downloading a kernel, although they get the option. Is that true?
So my setup would be safe from a users point of view..

Best regards
keld