Switching from DHCP-assigned to Static IP?
DHCP is being handled from my router -- not my WHS.
When I first set up WHS, it automatically grabbed 192.168.x.103 from the router. The router was set up to dish out IPs from 100 - 253. IPs below 100 are valid, just not part of the DHCP address pool.
So, I changed the IP from 103 to 192.168.x.2 (router is x.x.x.1). No problem except now my desktop clients can't connect to the WHS.
Now, all my client computers are grayed-out when I look at them in the Console.
Will it be just a matter of time before the IP change is reflected on the client computers? When I have tried to connect to the Console from the client computers, it returns an error saying something to the effect, "cannot find Windows Home Server." I uninstalled/installed the connector software but it could not find the WHS.
Can you illuminate me on what is going on?
Thanks!
回答
Back to the OP,
Will,
If you have changed the server's IP address, in any way, then your Clients won't know where it has gone to! What you will need to do, is go into the Program Files/Windows Home Server folder on each Client, and run the program 'discovery.exe', this will search your network for the server, and re-set the connections for the Console, Shared Folders etc.
Colin
すべての返信
- I've seen this same problem with other devices as well. Recommend giving WHS a STATIC address in the 100-253 range.
- You should not give your server an IP address in the router's DHCP address range. That IP address may eventually be assigned by your router to some other computer or device on your network.
Can you ping your server by name from other PCs on your network? By IP address? Can you run the command ipconfig /all in a command prompt on both your server and one of your (working) PCs and post the results here? Ken Warren wrote: You should not give your server an IP address in the router's DHCP address range. That IP address may eventually be assigned by your router to some other computer or device on your network. Maybe it depends on your router brand, but my Linksys would not work correctly with WHS and another media device in my home without assigning static addresses in the router's DHCP's address range. It blocks addresses outside that range. This can probably be overridden, but why bother?
Plus, if it's static, the router is not going to assign that address to another device.
Bobsie wrote: Maybe it depends on your router brand, but my Linksys would not work correctly with WHS and another media device in my home without assigning static addresses in the router's DHCP's address range. It blocks addresses outside that range. This can probably be overridden, but why bother? Because, as Ken said, your router may assign an IP already in use (by a static IP). I would check your Linksys router because that's not normal. (FYI, my Linksys WRT54G works just fine when I assign static IPs outside of the DHCP pool.)
kariya21 wrote: Bobsie wrote: Maybe it depends on your router brand, but my Linksys would not work correctly with WHS and another media device in my home without assigning static addresses in the router's DHCP's address range. It blocks addresses outside that range. This can probably be overridden, but why bother? Because, as Ken said, your router may assign an IP already in use (by a static IP). I would check your Linksys router because that's not normal. (FYI, my Linksys WRT54G works just fine when I assign static IPs outside of the DHCP pool.)
I will, of course, take your word for how yours works. But my Linksys RVS4000 doesn't work that way. I spent the better part of a day coming to that conclusion.
- Bobsie, if you assign a static IP address to a computer (this is an operation performed directly on the computer in question), it should be in the same subnet as DHCP addresses being handed out by your DHCP server. If you want to use static DHCP /DHCP reservation (this is an operation performed on the router), the address being reserved should be in the range of addresses the DHCP server has been told to hand out.
Ken Warren wrote: Bobsie, if you assign a static IP address to a computer (this is an operation performed directly on the computer in question), it should be in the same subnet as DHCP addresses being handed out by your DHCP server. If you want to use static DHCP /DHCP reservation (this is an operation performed on the router), the address being reserved should be in the range of addresses the DHCP server has been told to hand out. Ken is right! You assigned an IP that is below the DHCP range. This would put the WHS on a network outside of your DHCP assigned network, and since the WHS is not acting as a DHCP server or a router itself.
Since you change your server IP to "192.168.x.2", then your router DHCP range should now start from "192.168.x.2", which will now include your WHS IP address.
Try this range instead: Your router is sitting with "192.168.x.1", then I would suggest starting at a rang of 192.168.x.65 and end at "192.168.x.254", you will need to assign your WHS an IP from this new pool.
Good luck.
Hugh
Back to the OP,
Will,
If you have changed the server's IP address, in any way, then your Clients won't know where it has gone to! What you will need to do, is go into the Program Files/Windows Home Server folder on each Client, and run the program 'discovery.exe', this will search your network for the server, and re-set the connections for the Console, Shared Folders etc.
Colin
IP address, as long as it is in the same subnet, is ok.
(If your router assigns 192.168.0.100 to 254, then 192.168.0.2 for the WHS would be ok, if not used by anything else.)
Just make sure, the subnet mask is identical - usually 255.255.255.0 in that address range and the default gateway + DNS server are set to the IP address of the router.
As Colin already mentioned, running discovery.exe on the clients should fix the problem of clients and server not cooperating any more after the address change.
Best greetings from Germany
Olaf
Hi Hugh,
hughojar wrote: Ken Warren wrote: Bobsie, if you assign a static IP address to a computer (this is an operation performed directly on the computer in question), it should be in the same subnet as DHCP addresses being handed out by your DHCP server. If you want to use static DHCP /DHCP reservation (this is an operation performed on the router), the address being reserved should be in the range of addresses the DHCP server has been told to hand out. Ken is right! You assigned an IP that is below the DHCP range. This would put the WHS on a network outside of your DHCP assigned network, and since the WHS is not acting as a DHCP server or a router itself.
Since you change your server IP to "192.168.x.2", then your router DHCP range should now start from "192.168.x.2", which will now include your WHS IP address.
please read again, what Ken wrote, seems you misunderstood something. The same subnet has not the same as the DHCP scope.
The DHCP scope is a part of the full subnet, but all are in the same address range and can find each other. So changing the DHCP scope and adding the WHS server manually with an address within that scope does nothing good.
Best greetings from Germany
Olaf
I understand what Ken was saying Olaf, but thanks for pointing that out, I was mearly using what Ken mentioned about "if you assign a static IP address to a computer (this is an operation performed directly on the computer in question), it should be in the same subnet as DHCP addresses being handed out by your DHCP server." to make a point about being in the same DHCP scope for the server.
What most of you are all forgetting is that WHS depends on upnp of your router to provide services to the clients. By hiding the WHS server from the DHCP scope, you mearly blocked most of the server's functions. Sure it will work outside of the DHCP scope, but with upnp being applied to the DHCP address range only, then sure your clients can't find the server.
Good luck.
Hugh
_______________________
Not without anguish!
Hi Hugh,
hughojar wrote: What most of you are all forgetting is that WHS depends on upnp of your router to provide services to the clients. By hiding the WHS server from the DHCP scope, you mearly blocked most of the server's functions. Sure it will work outside of the DHCP scope, but with upnp being applied to the DHCP address range only, then sure your clients can't find the server.
the interesting part is here, that I have a strange name resolution issue in my home network with the router set as DNS server and a fixed IP address on the WHS:
All works fine.
I can ping all stations, all clients find the server and vice versa.
But strange enough - with nslookup WHS I get an IP address reported from back my router, which is in the DHCP range, but has no relation to the fixed address of WHS since installation (I did not care about the assigned address back in this time, so I am not sure, if it really was the same). The address is also not listed in the list of known network devices, which keeps almost any historical information. So where does it get this misinformation from?
Asked the maker of the router (AVM FRITZ!Box 7270) for support, and a final answer is still open.
Best greetings from Germany
Olaf
I don't know much about this router you're using Olaf, but what I notice with most routers, take the Wireless-G Broadband Router with SpeedBooster from linksys for one. This router is really three devices in one box.
First, there's the Wireless Access Point, which lets you connect Wireless-G, Wireless-B, and other performance-enhanced SpeedBooster devices to the network. There's also a built-in 4-port full-duplex 10/100 Switch to connect your wired-Ethernet devices together. Finally, the Router function ties it all together and let your whole network share a high-speed cable or DSL Internet connection in one messed up location.
The trouble is, this router has an issue with assigning IP's outside of DHCP range. This happens if you have a device such as a wireless print-server with built in DHCP attached to the router itself. This will cause the router to use alternative function.
The only way to fix this issue is to relieve the DHCP function of the router or the other device on the net. Another thin is some manufacture built dual DHCP for their route, one for the Ethernet ports (10/100 Mbit/s), and another for wlan. This sometimes present a problem in the router.
One solution is to disable DHCP for the router and assigned the DHCP and NS lookup to one of your server from inside the network.
Good luck.
Hugh
__________________
Not without anguish!
Ken Warren wrote: Bobsie, if you assign a static IP address to a computer (this is an operation performed directly on the computer in question), it should be in the same subnet as DHCP addresses being handed out by your DHCP server. If you want to use static DHCP /DHCP reservation (this is an operation performed on the router), the address being reserved should be in the range of addresses the DHCP server has been told to hand out. Ken, I never would have thought that people would even think of assigning IP addresses directly on the computers in question. That truly does sound dangerous. I would always assign addresses via the router. I'm glad we all seem to agree now...best practice is to assign WHS, via the router, a static address that is within the router's DHCP range.
- Best practice is to use the DHCP server's capabilities to assign IP addresses, yes. But that's not really related to central control of IP addresses. Computers that obtain an IP address through DHCP also obtain other settings the same way. Those settings include subnet mask, gateway, DNS, etc. They add up to the subnet definition for the computer. In the home, having one computer with a different subnet definition (perhaps different DNS) can cause a number of subtle and hard to diagnose issues.
Actually, I would not agree with assigning static IPs in DHCP address ranges. As Bobsie stated, "That truly does sound dangerous.", and it is for many reasons, but I will only point out a few.
The negative aspect of doing this is that if you later want to change the network settings for that machine, you must manually go and configure that machine. An example would be if one of your NS servers changed its IP address. Additionally, you have to keep track somewhere of the fact that you have assigned a specific IP address to that machine.
Rather than configuring the machine manually, you can reserve an IP address from the DHCP server for that specific machine. This has the same result as manually configuring a static IP address a sort of (binding a particular machine addres to its DHCP assigned IP, this creates a static bond, but offers two benefits.
-
You now have one location to keep track of all assigned static address. and
-
Through the DHCP server you will provide network settings to all the machines on the local subnet.
The gain is good in this setup, and later on if you wish to change those settings, the change can be simply done on your DHCP and NS server. All DHCP clients will then receive those updated changes when they renew their DHCP-provided addresses, and preventing an assigned IP conflict.
Good luck.
Hugh
__________________
Not without anguish!
-
Although it may be best practice to reserve an IP address on the router for the server, this has some difficulties:
-
How many of the home server audience is able to identify the MAC address of the server and put an address reservation for that address into this router?
-
With many different routers with proprietary interfaces on the market, how can we guide them to success?
-
What is with users, who do not have a router to connect to the Internet, but rely on ICS?
-
If the router gets exchanged, who remembers the fixed IP address?
So I find it much easier, to change the IP settings on the server as the only one place, which is a well documented procedure. But again, that's only an opinion in the mixture and not a dogma.
Best greetings from Germany
Olaf
-
Well, those are all valid questions Olaf and there are different scenarios with different brand routers out there. the qood news about all this is that the router and servers can all be accessed from a central location. So there is no running aroud to get this setup properly, provided that all devices on the network is turned on and is connected.
All this can be performed directly on the DHCP router it self. We can only provide the necessary information for a generic scenario, and hope that they can find the best solutions that fits their problem.
Most people that rely on ICS without a router is simply using the best resource in their reach, one such group of people are lab tech students, setup for schools. They don't realy use the internet on a regular base and simply use a single rs232 modem for connection.
An exchanged router is no big problem, really. Once you connect the router to the network it automatically assigned IPs, so it is a matter of just entering mac address to the assigned ips already established.
Some router will allow you to run a pre configured script that will auto reserved the IPs to the machines. For instance, if you have a machine called "needIPs", simple state in the script to assign "192.x.x.x" to "needIPs", and it is done without you lifting much of a finger.
Good luck.
Hugh
___________________
Not without anguish!
- Hugh, please go back and read what was actually written. Nobody was recommending the assignment of static IP addresses (addresses assigned through client configuration, not DHCP) in the DHCP address range.
hughojar wrote: Actually, I would not agree with assigning static IPs in DHCP address ranges. As Bobsie stated, "That truly does sound dangerous.", and it is for many reasons, but I will only point out a few.
Olaf is pontificating about a different (non)issue. - In the general case, Olaf, best practice is to set the DHCP server (often a router, but not always) to issue "static" addresses through DHCP reservations. that guarantees that all computers are on the same subnet, with the same configuration. In the specific case of the home network, I still think that's best practice if your router supports it. However, as a practical matter, if your router fully supports the UPnP configuration that Windows Home Server does, there's no need to assign a static IP address to your server. Your server will detect if/when it's IP address changes and reconfigure the router at that time.
Ken Warren wrote: hughojar wrote: Actually, I would not agree with assigning static IPs in DHCP address ranges. As Bobsie stated, "That truly does sound dangerous.", and it is for many reasons, but I will only point out a few.
Hugh, please go back and read what was actually written. Nobody was recommending the assignment of static IP addresses (addresses assigned through client configuration, not DHCP) in the DHCP address range.
Olaf is pontificating about a different (non)issue.Actually, the issue did came up Ken, in a few post. That is why I made the comment, as it is a bad idea to statically assigned IP from the machines point on a DHCP assigned network. IP conflict is bound to happen at some point later on.
Maybe it is you who should read through the thread carefully.
Good luck.
Hugh
_____________________
Not without anguish!
hughojar wrote: Actually, the issue did came up Ken, in a few post. That is why I made the comment, as it is a bad idea to statically assigned IP from the machines point on a DHCP assigned network. IP conflict is bound to happen at some point later on. No, it's not. There is absolutely nothing wrong with assigning a static IP address to a network device as long as the assigned IP address is outside the range of the DHCP pool. IP conflict is impossible in that scenario.
hughojar wrote: Maybe it is you who should read through the thread carefully. Good luck.
Hugh
_____________________
Not without anguish!
Bobsie wrote: Ken, I never would have thought that people would even think of assigning IP addresses directly on the computers in question. That truly does sound dangerous. I would always assign addresses via the router. I'm glad we all seem to agree now...best practice is to assign WHS, via the router, a static address that is within the router's DHCP range. While what you say will work, I personally don't agree. I still believe any server (home or otherwise) should be set to a static IP address. All my servers at work are static and my server at home is also static. I want those IPs locked down and no chance of them changing at all, ever. (And no, it's not dangerous at all. Worst case scenario is you give 2 computers the same IP address and you get an "IP Conflict" error, then you have to fix it.)
kariya21 wrote: hughojar wrote: Actually, the issue did came up Ken, in a few post. That is why I made the comment, as it is a bad idea to statically assigned IP from the machines point on a DHCP assigned network. IP conflict is bound to happen at some point later on. No, it's not. There is absolutely nothing wrong with assigning a static IP address to a network device as long as the assigned IP address is outside the range of the DHCP pool. IP conflict is impossible in that scenario.
hughojar wrote: Maybe it is you who should read through the thread carefully. Good luck.
Hugh
_____________________
Not without anguish!
I think you're ignoring Ken's excellent point, which I'll repeat here:
Computers that obtain an IP address through DHCP also obtain other settings the same way. Those settings include subnet mask, gateway, DNS, etc. They add up to the subnet definition for the computer. In the home, having one computer with a different subnet definition (perhaps different DNS) can cause a number of subtle and hard to diagnose issues.
Bobsie wrote: kariya21 wrote: hughojar wrote: Actually, the issue did came up Ken, in a few post. That is why I made the comment, as it is a bad idea to statically assigned IP from the machines point on a DHCP assigned network. IP conflict is bound to happen at some point later on. No, it's not. There is absolutely nothing wrong with assigning a static IP address to a network device as long as the assigned IP address is outside the range of the DHCP pool. IP conflict is impossible in that scenario.
hughojar wrote: Maybe it is you who should read through the thread carefully. Good luck.
Hugh
_____________________
Not without anguish!
I think you're ignoring Ken's excellent point, which I'll repeat here:
Computers that obtain an IP address through DHCP also obtain other settings the same way. Those settings include subnet mask, gateway, DNS, etc. They add up to the subnet definition for the computer. In the home, having one computer with a different subnet definition (perhaps different DNS) can cause a number of subtle and hard to diagnose issues.
Well Bobsie, somtimes it amazes me that a point you are trying to make goes over others head, when you make it so clear, and you're right. Many things that is obtained on the LAN is done through DHCP assignment, and not static. A client with a static Ip will misses out on many features and resource on the LAN. Take the WHS for example, which relys on UPNP standard through DHCP. UPNP on the network where WHS can find it, becomes a problem without it...and it don't matter if you have UPNP, if the server cannot find it, some essential resources will became unobtainable.
Bobsie wrote: I think you're ignoring Ken's excellent point which I'll repeat here: Computers that obtain an IP address through DHCP also obtain other settings the same way. Those settings include subnet mask, gateway, DNS, etc. They add up to the subnet definition for the computer. In the home, having one computer with a different subnet definition (perhaps different DNS) can cause a number of subtle and hard to diagnose issues.
Yes, all of those points are absolutely correct (and no, I'm not ignoring Ken's point). My point to hughojar is if you set it up with a static IP address properly (manually assign a network device a unique IP address outside the range of the DHCP pool and manually give it the same subnet mask, default gateway, and DNS servers as what is handed out by your DHCP server/router), it most definitely does work. Now is that the most user-friendly way to set it up? Of course not (and I think that's where some people have issues when they try it themselves, perhaps even going so far as to try more than 1 method at once and end up making a huge mess of it). But then again, the uPnP isn't 100% reliable either (look through this forum and you will find a number of people who can't get that to work, presumably because their particular brand of router isn't uPnP compatible with WHS).
hughojar wrote: Well Bobsie, somtimes it amazes me that a point you are trying to make goes over others head, when you make it so clear, and you're right. Many things that is obtained on the LAN is done through DHCP assignment, and not static. True, but that's because it's easier to maintain, not because it's necessary.
hughojar wrote: A client with a static Ip will misses out on many features and resource on the LAN. Not true at all. My server is a true static IP address (meaning no DHCP Reservation or uPnP) and every single feature of it works exactly as it's supposed to (including interactivity with all other networked devices in my household).
hughojar wrote: Take the WHS for example, which relys on UPNP standard through DHCP. WHS doesn't "rely" on uPnP. uPnP is part of WHS to make it easier for non-technical users to set up various networking features, including Remote Access (and as I said in my last post, uPnP is not 100% reliable anyway). But WHS will still work if you choose to skip uPnP entirely and instead use a static IP address (as long as you do it correctly).
hughojar wrote: UPNP on the network where WHS can find it, becomes a problem without it...and it don't matter if you have UPNP, if the server cannot find it, some essential resources will became unobtainable.
