[MLB-WIRELESS] IP allocations within a node???

[Mark Aitken]

Hi John,

My problem with static IP's, as I understand it, with the required 
netmask, 255.255.255.240, then that effectivily segments nodes from each 
other and would require a router/NAT arrangement in place to bridge 
between segments.  Our networks are not that safisticated at this time.  
We are only given a certain amount of useful address per node, 14 I 
think plus 2 for network and broadcast.  If we dont DHCP in such a 
restricted range then some may miss out once a few servers come online 
and activity increases???

Maybe I dont understand this issue enough?

But I am open to explaining and learning.

Regards

Mark


John McClumpha wrote:

> Hi Mark,
>
> I'd suggest not using DHCP for this as if a connection is lost & then 
> regained a new (different) ip address may be allocated - thus causing 
> problems where servers change addresses (and if DNS is in place, more 
> problems there too) - I'd suggest sticking with static IPs, which is 
> what Cam and I are planning to do.
>
> As you probably guessed, we didn't have any luck seeing HRW on friday 
> night - although we were able to pick up other APs (non MW) *behind* it!
>
> When I return from interstate we'll do some more experimenting and see 
> what we can come up with - INR should have a fully functional 
> waveguide omni by then so hopefully INQ will be able to see that :)
>
> John
> node INQ
>



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.1 - Release Date: 27/02/2005


To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message