dhcp client question.
dj at lucasit.com
Mon Jul 28 10:42:57 PDT 2003
Ng, Wey-Han wrote:
> I was following the blfs book and see that there are two dhcp client provided
> and one of them comes together with the dhcp server package (namely
> dhclient). However, I find no explanation or reason for not using the dhclient
> that came with the dhcpd.
This is to provide a choice. Initially more were planned.
> Though, I am very sure there is one or else the
> book will not have mention dhcpcd at all, nor will most distribution I have
> come across be using dhcpcd.
> So my question is, apart from being a preference thing, why would
> someone choose dhcpcd over dhclient? Security? Ease of usage?
Ease of use.
My answer to this question is only an opinion. I like dhcpcd. I have
four reasons myself. First, it's been, in my experience, less finicky
with certain routers. Second, it's options are (well, they were when I
started) a bit easier to undrstand. Third, info about the interface is
already present in a file that can be sourced by any bash script.
Fourth, I see no need/reason to put both the client and the server in
the same package.
Each of my opinions can be countered quite easily. First, don't buy
cheap routers etc.... This issue has been fixed anyways (that was over
two years ago) and it was a problem with the router's firmware I
believe. Second, it's options are not really more difficult to
understand, just different. Third, dhclient has an even better option
to pass information to a script than dhcpcd does...I don't know anything
about this option, personally, but the documentation is there. Fourth,
others would say that it stands to reason to get get both client and
server in the same package.
What I'd suggest is to take a look at the manpages or info's on each one
and make a choice, or just try them both out. Others may see things
differently, or know more.
More information about the blfs-support