Server or Router -- which should handle DHCP?

[Strykar]

I'm installing Windows 2003 for the first time and currently have a WRT54G in place, which would you recommend for running DHCP?

 

[Spartacus]

In most small environments it doesn't matter.

In some cases you'd want to have it on the server if you are doing RAS/VPN on the server too. Other cases, you want to leave it on the router to service clients when the server is down.

It just depends on what you want/need.

 

[Malk-a-mite]

Shouldn't matter either way.

I switched over to 2003 for DHCP addressing only because I was moving to a AD environment at home and wanted to limit the number of machines I needed to admin at home. Now the 2003 box handles DHCP, DNS, and AD.

Router (linux distro in this case) now just handles firewall duties and routing.

 

[xphil3]

I'm installing Windows 2003 for the first time and currently have a WRT54G in place, which would you recommend for running DHCP?

win2k3 server since you're already taking to time to learn it. Learn about all the other services as well. DNS,RIS,TS,SUS, etc.

 

[Teecee]

What everyone else says. Small network doesnt matter but learning how to work with w2k3 servers is not a bad thing at all.

 

[Blitzrommel]

If you're using Active Directory, let the server do DHCP. But you could at least set up the router to have the settings in there, so if the server goes down for whatever reason, you can just go enable DHCP and it'll cover until you bring your server back up.

Otherwise, use the router.