Lynksys Wireless Router/Modem
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: NEWS: FCC boss stumps for free and open internet
Next: Downloading only a particular page/selective pages of a document from the internet or other file server - Free Tool
From: Christopher A. Lee on 14 Jan 2010 20:44 On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:49:15 -0600, Char Jackson <none(a)none.invalid> wrote: >On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:59:26 -0500, Christopher A. Lee ><calee(a)optonline.net> wrote: > >>It bugs me that I can't save my configuration and restore it to the >>updated firmware on mine, because I have changed so many settings. >> >>Including using fixed IP addresses for practically everything on the >>network because of limitations in Windows network printing which uses >>IP addresses instead of URLs even though they would change when things >>are powered on in a different order. That should have read "limitations in Windows like network printing". >If you feel that you need static IP addressing for a networked print >server or a PC that's sharing a printer on the network, that doesn't >mean any other nodes need to be statically configured. You can, of >course, but don't need to unless yours is a fairly unique situation. I don't feel it, that's how Windows works. If you look at the properties of a networked printer it holds the IP address not a URL. Without a fixed IP addy you have to delete it and add it again if things are powered up in a different order. Which they always are. Bit torrents need a forwarded port for PCs otherwise traffic is throttled which also means static IP even though I don't use it very often. The network attached storage also likes a static IP if the router gets reset for any reason. If I never used torrents the PCs would not need static IP, but I do occasionally. This means everything has static IP. With properly designed software and firmware it shouldn't be necessary.
From: Char Jackson on 14 Jan 2010 23:17 On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 20:44:48 -0500, Christopher A. Lee <calee(a)optonline.net> wrote: >On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:49:15 -0600, Char Jackson <none(a)none.invalid> >wrote: > >>On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:59:26 -0500, Christopher A. Lee >><calee(a)optonline.net> wrote: >> >>>It bugs me that I can't save my configuration and restore it to the >>>updated firmware on mine, because I have changed so many settings. >>> >>>Including using fixed IP addresses for practically everything on the >>>network because of limitations in Windows network printing which uses >>>IP addresses instead of URLs even though they would change when things >>>are powered on in a different order. > >That should have read "limitations in Windows like network printing". > >>If you feel that you need static IP addressing for a networked print >>server or a PC that's sharing a printer on the network, that doesn't >>mean any other nodes need to be statically configured. You can, of >>course, but don't need to unless yours is a fairly unique situation. > >I don't feel it, that's how Windows works. > >If you look at the properties of a networked printer it holds the IP >address not a URL. Without a fixed IP addy you have to delete it and >add it again if things are powered up in a different order. > >Which they always are. > >Bit torrents need a forwarded port for PCs otherwise traffic is >throttled which also means static IP even though I don't use it very >often. > >The network attached storage also likes a static IP if the router gets >reset for any reason. > >If I never used torrents the PCs would not need static IP, but I do >occasionally. > >This means everything has static IP. > >With properly designed software and firmware it shouldn't be >necessary. > Now that you mention these other things, I see what you mean.
From: Peter Pan on 14 Jan 2010 23:39 "Char Jackson" <none(a)none.invalid> wrote in message news:inevk5t2san94q7c4p8v2drh7hce5nc19l(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:59:26 -0500, Christopher A. Lee > <calee(a)optonline.net> wrote: > >>It bugs me that I can't save my configuration and restore it to the >>updated firmware on mine, because I have changed so many settings. >> >>Including using fixed IP addresses for practically everything on the >>network because of limitations in Windows network printing which uses >>IP addresses instead of URLs even though they would change when things >>are powered on in a different order. > > If you feel that you need static IP addressing for a networked print > server or a PC that's sharing a printer on the network, that doesn't > mean any other nodes need to be statically configured. You can, of > course, but don't need to unless yours is a fairly unique situation. > i have to wonder, have you looked at network shares instead of network places? i have a bunch set up that way, and don't use ip address on any of em (for example, the printer on my gateway is //gateway/printer
From: Aaron Leonard on 21 Jan 2010 17:03 ~ >at any rate, i hate static addresses, and jump thru all sorts of hoops to ~ >never have em/use em.... ~ ~ IP assignments on my LAN are 100% static here. As a network design ~ engineer for a large telecom, it goes against everything I know to let ~ DHCP assign pseudo-random addresses on my network. I understand, ~ though, that not everyone feels the same way, and many consider DHCP ~ to be easier. I don't share that opinion, but I understand it. The easiest thing for me is to have all my systems use DHCP, but have my DHCP server assign fixed IP addresses to each client (based upon the client ID / MAC address.) That way I don't have to run around configuring all my end systems, and also if I move a system from network to network, it picks up the right addresses automatically. And I have a central place (the DHCP server) that provides all the MAC-address mappings. Of course I cheat and use a Cisco IOS router as the DHCP server, but lots of other DHCP servers could do this too.
From: Moe Trin on 22 Jan 2010 15:00
On Thu, 21 Jan 2010, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.internet.wireless, in article <qljhl5p70jiv4vtpn86ms39f8b6cshhoe0(a)4ax.com>, Aaron Leonard wrote: >~ >at any rate, i hate static addresses, and jump thru all sorts of >~ >hoops tonever have em/use em.... One wonders about the effort needed jumping through all of those hoops compare to the effort of setting things statically - but that's your choice. >~ IP assignments on my LAN are 100% static here. As a network design >~ engineer for a large telecom, it goes against everything I know to >~ let DHCP assign pseudo-random addresses on my network. Agree >The easiest thing for me is to have all my systems use DHCP, but have >my DHCP server assign fixed IP addresses to each client (based upon >the client ID / MAC address.) And you assign the 'client ID' and 'MAC address' from the DHCP server? I don't think so. So you had to fire up each client system, figure out where the magic information is hidden, copy it EXACTLY, and then transfer this data to the DHCP server without typ0s (assuming you also know where this information needs to go in the server config). And of course your networks are physically isolated and secured so that no one can be spoofing/setting their MAC address. >That way I don't have to run around configuring all my end systems How often are you changing / re-configuring your systems? Other than lap-tops, most people aren't playing musical computers and moving things. It's a one-time deal, and it's done. >and also if I move a system from network to network, it picks up the >right addresses automatically. And I have a central place (the DHCP >server) that provides all the MAC-address mappings. You have one DHCP server for all of your networks? Must have been fun to set up - something the average home user isn't going to be doing. Yes, if your computer is moving from network to network, a DHCP client is probably the way to go, but unless you are using a cryptographic signiture scheme, you may be a bit to trusting. My laptops only move between three different networks, and they have (selectable) fixed setups for each. >Of course I cheat and use a Cisco IOS router as the DHCP server, but >lots of other DHCP servers could do this too. As you work for Cisco, I'm sure the company expects that. As for the other DHCP servers, most users have no knowledge of how to set them up and are expecting that what-ever defaults were used are enough to allow connections. That's why RFC3927 addresses are so necessary. "The Internet must be b0rk3n - I can connect to the router OK." Old guy |