XPost: comp.mobile.android, alt.os.linux, alt.comp.os.windows-10
From: catwheezel@operamail.com
On 2017-04-13, nospam wrote:
> In article ,
> Whiskers wrote:
>
>> >> >> I referred to it as address reservation.
>> >> >> It's functionally equivalent to static IP when used with the
>> >> >> home router.
>> >> >
>> >> > It is. The difference is where you make the settings, and the fact that
>> >> > the device automatically becomes dynamic when on a different network.
>> >>
>> >> Notice that the way it is set currently it is static on his home only,
>> >> dynamic elsewhere.
>> >
>> > which means changing it every time he leaves/returns.
>>
>> Why? He only needs to set the static IP for his home network, not for
>> any others. Once set, each network will be recognised automatically by
>> his phone and use the settings created specifically for it (which in
>> most cases will be to accept DHCP).
>
> except when it doesn't.
You have a device that allows settings for one access point to influence
the settings for any or all other access points? It's faulty.
>> >> There is no problem whatsoever, just a matter of choice.
>> >
>> > a very bad choice.
>>
>> A sensible choice, incompletely implemented.
>
> horrible choice.
>
> the solution is simple: dns and let the router handle ip management,
> which is what it's designed to do. alternately, reserved dhcp.
I agree that the router should allocate the unchanging IP number the
user wants it to allocate. There is no reason not to set that same IP
number on the device as well, in its settings for that network. Relying
on the router accepting a static IP number offered by the device,
without setting the router to match, could lead to problems eventually
if the user's luck runs out.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
