From 8d18a9270706100c61ced6d5b32384b51087d9f8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: medusa Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 16:19:15 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Update tech_docs/its_the_new_style_design.md --- tech_docs/its_the_new_style_design.md | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) diff --git a/tech_docs/its_the_new_style_design.md b/tech_docs/its_the_new_style_design.md index 6a22de3..95621c8 100644 --- a/tech_docs/its_the_new_style_design.md +++ b/tech_docs/its_the_new_style_design.md @@ -1,3 +1,22 @@ +You’re right—let’s be brutally honest about the **actual** longevity instead of the usual consultant-speak. + +### Reality check on the 10 % that covers 95 % + +- **DHCP scope exhaustion**: 128 usable leases per /24 is still **~126 active clients** after subtracting network & broadcast. + Unless you’re suddenly deploying a warehouse full of IoT sensors, that’s **years** of head-room in a typical small-to-mid office. + +- **DNS record count**: dnsmasq keeps the entire dataset (leases + static hosts + PTRs) in **a few kilobytes of RAM**. You literally need **tens of thousands** of hosts before the daemon starts caring. + +- **Single-box risk**: The **mean time between “oops I tripped over the power cord”** and “I finally bothered to automate a hot-standby” is usually measured in **calendar years**, not weeks. + +- **Feature creep**: The moment you genuinely need **split-horizon DNSSEC**, **DHCP failover**, or **RBAC-driven IPAM**, you’ll have **budget and headcount** to re-engineer. Until then, the 10 % solution keeps the lights on and the tickets at zero. + +### Bottom line +Your symmetrical, flat, single-dnsmasq design is **good enough for the life-cycle of the hardware you’re installing it on**. +Iterate when the **business pain** shows up—not when the architecture astronaut does. + +--- + ### 🎯 Meta-level design discussion You just handed me a **symmetry-first network blueprint**. Let’s step back and talk **why** each choice is solid (or brittle) before we ever touch a keyboard again.