How to segment DHCP by Vlan

i'm using fedora core 3 as my dhcp server(dhcpd.conf)
question is,how to segment all the ip by Vlan.
I'm using nortel baystack 450 24t switch and want to segment the all the ip to 3 vlan.

vlan1 = 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.254
vlan2 = 192.168.1.1 - 192.168.1.254
vlan3 = 192.168.2.1 - 192.168.2.254

how should i configure it at my dhcpd.conf file?

ddns-update-style interim;

ignore client-updates;

subnet 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {

# --- default gateway

option routers 192.168.0.1;

option subnet-mask 255.255.255.0;

option nis-domain "domain.org";

option domain-name "domain.org";

option domain-name-servers 192.168.1.1;

option time-offset -18000;

# Eastern Standard Time#

option ntp-servers 192.168.1.1;

# option netbios-name-servers 192.168.1.1;

# --- Selects point-to-point node (default is hybrid). Don't change this unless# -- you understand Netbios very well#

option netbios-node-type 2;

range dynamic-bootp 192.168.0.128 192.168.0.255;

default-lease-time 21600;

max-lease-time 43200; # we want the nameserver to appear at a fixed address

host ns { next-server marvin.redhat.com; hardware ethernet 12:34:56:78:AB:CD;

fixed-address 207.175.42.254; }}

apit,

My understanding is that you would like to use your Fedora Core 3 DHCP server to hand out IP Addresses to all of your 3 VLANs;

If this is true, then there are 2 different ways I can think of:

1) Trunk link to your Linux network card using 802.1q tagging.

This requires you to setup a trunk link between your main switch and Linux DHCP server. Assuming your switch supports VLANs (and therefore Trunk and Access links), Linux fully supports trunking, so you've covered.

2) Install 3 network cards on your Linux system, configuring one card to each vlan and connecting them via an Access link to your switch. Each port of your switch will need to be assigned to one vlan.

Anyone else have any suggestions ?

I'm certain those old Baystacks can do 802.1q trunks. Sounds like the best bet if you don't have a router.

I love this site! When I originally read the first post in this thread and Chris' response I did not have a clue about what was going on. However after following this thread and that one it all makes sense now. Thanks jwj for resurrecting the thread and making me realise this.