[K12OSN] Tossing around an idea...need some input

[Les Mikesell]

On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 21:49, David Trask wrote:

> this idea works except it's possible for one machine to be faster than the
> other, thus getting all the glory...isn't it?  Hence the load balance
> never happens when it comes to terminals.

If one is substantially faster than another, I'd think that is the
one that you would want to use...  

>   OR  if you did a small range
> of, say, 30 addresses on one server.....it's entirely possible for
> standalone workstations (windows machines, ugh) to take up all 30 of those
> addresses....thus the terminal server never even gets used....right?

Yes, that could be a problem if you need to serve some number
of addresses that don't correspond to the number of clients
that attach.  If the machines don't change that often you
could assign static IPs via hardware-address entries known
to all servers to keep them from using the dynamic ranges.
I think a simple change to the dhcp server code to make
it add a tiny delay based on it's current load or connections
would make them balance fairly well without making needing
to limit the ranges to exactly the number of clients you
want.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
    les at futuresource.com