Well, you can use either one you want, but only use one. Server 2003 may
have more functionality in its implementation of DHCP than the Netgear box
has, and that is what I would personally go with.
The 2003 will also allow DNS, DHCP, and WINS to all work happily together
and things will stay updated more dependably.
--
Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com
"Gerald Roston" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Oci$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Currently, it is an inexpensive Netgear router with basic firewall
> functionality. It is our plan to upgrade this to a more capable device,
such
> as the Netscreen-5GT plus.
>
> <207.46.248.16> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > What is the type of router you are using?
> >
> > "Gerald Roston" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > I will be migrating a peer-to-peer network of workstations to a local
> > domain
> > > with a Windows 2003 Server machine. Currently, the DHCP service is
> > provided
> > > by our router.
> > >
> > > QUESTION: Is it better to have a router provide the DHCP service or
> should
> > > this service be provided by the server? If the latter is the better
> > option,
> > > how do you set up the new server on the existing network without
causing
> > > DHCP conflicts?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > --
> > > Gerry Roston
> > > Pair of Docs Consulting
> > > (E-Mail Removed)
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>