> Bart Smit wrote:
> 
> > Hi Manuel & lists (cc-ing -dev),
> > 
> >> m0n0wall loses the DHCP lease database on reboot - this is a design 
> >> choice.
> > 
> > 
> > After actually digging up and reading the relevant RFC (2131), I feel 
> > the need to reiterate my previously stated point that this is a bad 
> > design choice. It conflicts with an explicit design goal of the DHCP 
> > mechanism. To quote:
> > 
> >  > The following list gives design goals specific to the transmission of
> >  > the network layer parameters.  DHCP must:
> > [...]
> >  >     o Retain DHCP client configuration across server reboots, and,
> >  >       whenever possible, a DHCP client should be assigned the same
> >  >       configuration parameters despite restarts of the DHCP
> mechanism,
> > 
> > I really feel this leaves no room for slack (apart from the fact that 
> > I'm one of those rare folks that is actually bitten by the loss of
> state) .
> > 
> > Will a big "please" do? :-)
> > 
> > --Bart
> > 
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> > For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> > 
> 
> I think you are going to have added cost as soon as you implement this: 
> especially with a short lease time, your CF will wear out very soon.
> 
> But: is it possible to use an NFS mount for these kind of things? If you 
> really need it you probably don't mind setting up another server w/ NFS 
> (eh... am I the only geek with to many servers? :)). Or, is this too 
> far-fetched?
> 
> Anyway, just a thought.
> 
> Michael
> 
if we are discussing about this it shout be possible to let the user choose
what option he wants.
sored on a cf card ( if big enough, maybe file size limit)
sored on a smb / nfs share.

but maybe this goes too far and breakes the simplicity of m0n0wall as
intended by mk

greets splasher (and sorry if my english is too bad ;))