You could try Mobile IP. That would require more design and configuration on your part than perhaps you wanted to get into, though, espeically if there are lots of mobile users. But it's proven to be quite useful for wirless mobile users who have the same problem that you're describing, of course.
It's not just Windoze that has the problem, is it? A Mac wouln't automatically figure out that you need a new IP address and default gateway either. But at least you don' t have to reboot with any versions of Mac OS. Well, you may not have to reboot a PC either if al you do is release and renew, or do you with 98 and earlier? Now, with AppleTalk, this sort of thing was much more automatic. But we still haven't achieved that level of sophistication in the IP world. ;-0 There is the Zero Conf group in IETF working on stuff like this. Priscilla Chuck's Long Road wrote: > > I see I should have made this one a "Friday Folly" :-> > > In a Big Flat Bridged Network, a mobile user unplugs the laptop > at one > office, drives over to the next office, plugs back in, and no > further action > is required. The Windoze PC has retained it's IP address, and > the network > doesn't care about location, because it is one big flat network. > > However, in the brand new ATM based AVVID ready routed network, > said mobile > user is now in a different segment in each location. With > Windoze, you have > to manually intervene. Sometimes you have to release the IP > address, reload > the computer, and then get your new DHCP assignment. Users > don't like this. > After all, now they have to do something, whereas before they > did not. Never > mind the higher speed, the failover capability of the routers, > the new 100 > mbs switches rather than 10mbs. They have to take an extra step > or two in > order to log in. > > This is normal behaviour for Windoze machines, and maybe for > DHCP clients in > general. I have had to do this release / renew for years. > > But to the customer, who is pretty naive in terms of > networking, there is a > "problem" that was caused by the new routers. To the users, > there is a > problem that never existed before. > > Like I said, serves me right. You give a customer a great new > network, and > you break something so rudimentary that it never would have > occurred > otherwise. :-> > > -- > > www.chuckslongroad.info > like my web site? > take the survey! > > > > ""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in > message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Spare us the mystery and tell us what you're getting at. :-) > Did you > forget > > to tell the DHCP server to provide the correct default > gateway address to > > the PCs? That's my guess, since you say everything else like > helper > > addresses, etc. is configured correctly. Just a late-night > theory, > waiting > > for Jay Leno to come on..... > > > > Thanks, > > > > Priscilla > > > > Chuck's Long Road wrote: > > > > > > The AVVID solution I sold a few months ago is gong through > > > implementation. > > > This project has been problematic for a lot of reasons, so > it > > > is not unusual > > > for a round of e-mails from the customer complaining about > one > > > thing or > > > another. > > > > > > Today was a good one, however. Shows to go you have to ask > > > things you > > > normally wouldn't think about. > > > > > > DHCP - no big deal. Works fine. All of us have probably > used it > > > or > > > configured it. All of us probably have experience with > running > > > several small > > > sites off a single DHCP server at a central site. > > > > > > So why is the customer complaining about DHCP not working, > and > > > it's because > > > our routers are screwed up and Microsoft told them that they > > > would have to > > > change their network addressing to a single class B rather > than > > > subnets of > > > /16 space, the way I designed it? > > > > > > The routers are configured correctly. The network is > designed > > > correctly - no > > > overlapping subnets. IP helpering is configured correctly. > > > > > > Problem occurs with several users, different NIC's, either > > > Win2K or WinXP. > > > No one common factor. Worked just fine before we put the new > > > routers in. > > > > > > Recognizing that Microsoft is full of C**P and their TCP > stack > > > is S**T, > > > still, why the problem. > > > > > > Gee, what happens to DHCP when you go from a single flat > > > bridged network to > > > a segmented routed network? Especially to mobile users, who > > > travel from site > > > to site for various reasons on a regular basis? > > > > > > Serves me right > > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > -- > > > > > > www.chuckslongroad.info > > > like my web site? > > > take the survey! > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=54434&t=54402 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
