Determining best way to assign IP addresses 1

[ransim]

Which type of IP address assignment would work best for a 150 user network, Dynamic or Static. Why is one better than the other?

 

[jfk]

This depends on user behavior and requirements. Usually, there are both on a subnet. Servers and gateways must use static addresses. The primary reason for Dynamic IP assignment is ease of configuration and administration. Assigning individual IP addresses can be a chore and as users go their merry way (borrowing IPs and assigning their own) it can be a real pain to manage. I've been there. For most users, dhcp is just fine.

 

[rjansen]

A good measure of whether to use Dynamic Vs. Static addressing is how dynamic your network is. If your users don't change equipment or move very often then static would probably work for 150 users. I would suggest keeping very good records of which user is assigned an address. If your users are moving alot and you are expecting any growth in the next 2 or 3 years it is better to bite the bullet now and install DHCP, it will save you lots of headaches as your network grows.

 

[KneeBreaker]

From my standpoint the issue is the fact that you have to keep track of the addresses if your are going to use static addresses, which can be a big headache. You get two the same and one and sometimes both do not talk on the network. The only place I use static addresses is on servers and the like that will probably NEVER change and I have control over. The rest are dynamic.

 

[ransim]

I narrow this questions as about 30 users will be on a LAN the other 120 will be using a WAN to connect and we have 30+ offices with approximately 4 users per office. What would be better under those conditions.

 

[jfk]

Sorry no reply in so long...<br>
<br>
I would suggest dhcp as a valuable solution for you and one that will ease the admin of all the WAN users. As the WAN users may not be online all the time, you can set the expiration on the IP assignment out a bit longer than default (try a week). You can't control the remote offices but you have central administration over the pool of IPs from the DHCP server. I believe that you'll find the dhcp solution to work better for you.<br>
<br>
jfk

 

[freebill]

My experience is that DHCP will make it easier to manage. However, there are security issues. I've been asked to sometimes go back 2-5 months to determine who had what address on so&so date to confirm a security investigation. I have spare addresses so I can afford to establish a 60 day lease for all DHCP assigned addresses. Thus by writing a script to copy the log file every week, I'm able to resolve my security concerns as well as enjoy the flexibility of DHCP.

 

[paulmcruz]

I manage an I-cafe and as I-cafe goes it is better (in my opinion) to have static addresses as this would allow me to keep track of what workstation is logged-on.

 

[jsauce]

I like using the DHCP server. Assigning static ip addresses to servers and then assigning dynamic ip addresses to the clients.

 

[Zelandakh]

A compromise that would cover all situations is to install and use DHCP on one of your domain controllers and use reservations for the workstations. That way each user will get the same IP address each time but it is centrally administered. You also get the advantage of knowing which station os doing what as they always have the same IP...

 

[jsauce]

Yes, if you are one of those untrusting Admins...hehe

 

[Zelandakh]

Who? Me? I have users who borrow the office managers key to the comms room and go in there and start playing... One person (a director) goes into the comms room the same way and restarts one of our ISDN routers if he has a problem on his computer. Go figure.<br>
<br>
Unfortunately, being a Director, he will not accept that the comms room is out of bounds!

 

[jsauce]

Damn, don't you hate it when people who should be working are having just a little too much fun?

 

[trooper]

Depending on what hardware you have, your DHCP Servers may not work across some routers. If the network is that spread out, I'd just break them off to supernets and go static. It will make routing a lot easier. You could go flat and just let everyone arp also. This isn't bad for limited workstations, but can get noisy as you grow. If you want to issue flat addresses, you'll need to change a reg key on the DHCP server. I don't have it handy- but you'll find it in the MS-/kb area. <br>
<br>