Ben, I could do that. I might have to try this out and see what happens and I also can adjust the lease time to something pretty long.
Thanks, On Jul 11, 2011, at 7:23 AM, Ben Mustill-Rose wrote: > I've slept on this one. > > Is it possible to set the scope of the dhcp on the comcast device so > that it will only ever assign 1 ip address? This should mean that its > dhcp server just won't respond to any requests for ip's from clients > after its 1 ip has been assigned, leaving the airport to do all the > work. I know this would mean that you have 2 dhcp servers on the same > network which I'm sure you know isn't advisable in most situations, > but hopefully this will be as good as not having the comcast box do > dhcp. > In this situation,that 1 device could be the airport. Technically the > airport wouldn't have a static ip in as much as its lease would expire > every now and again and it would request a new ip from the comcast > device, but if the scope of the dhcp is set to 192.168.0.2 / > 192.168.0.2, it wouldn't be possible for the airport to ever get > anything other than .0.2. > > Doesn't really solve the nat issue though, let us know if you find a solution. > > On 11/07/2011, Scott Howell <[email protected]> wrote: >> Mike, the goal was not to complicate anything. The initial goal was to just >> get up and running with as few changes as possible. They did the install in >> the middle of my work day, so I had to just plugin and go. As is things work >> for the most part, but for IPV6 tunneling and I can live without this for a >> while. In fact I can live with how things are now, but would like to at >> least explore longterm solutions. This is the first I have encountered this >> type of situation and of course I would prefer not to give up the mac >> address filtering. I can do this on the cable modem, but it does not provide >> the kind of control I want that is provided by the AirPort. >> In any case this will be a lesson in networking for sure. :) >> >> tnx, >> >> On Jul 10, 2011, at 7:53 PM, Mike Arrigo wrote: >> >>> Not sure if you're using wireless, but my suggestion is, use the routing >>> features of the com cast modem itself. This would mean you would need to >>> give up the mac address control but if you turn off the ss id broadcast >>> and have a good password for your wifi network, you should be fine. No >>> sense making things more complicated than they need to be. >>> On Jul 10, 2011, at 5:06 PM, Scott Howell wrote: >>> >>>> All, >>>> >>>> Here is the situation. I recently switched to Comcast business class. I >>>> was provided with a SMC Network cable modem. THis box is actually a >>>> switch consisting of four ports. Currently I have my AirPort router >>>> plugged into the SMC and thus I have a double nat situation. THe SMC is >>>> configured to handout DHCP addresses, which is how my AirPort gets its >>>> address, but I also am handing out addresses using DHCP to the devices on >>>> my private network. I actually am using DHCP reservations and for a >>>> specific reason. >>>> I have setup mac address filtering to control certain machines on the >>>> network. Unfortunately the SMC lacks some of the features for controlling >>>> machines that are found in the Apple router. However, this double nat >>>> situation can and has created some issues for me. I could of course just >>>> bridge the AirPort and give up the whole deal on controlling machines on >>>> the network. That may very well end up being necessary in the end; >>>> however, before I do so, I wanted to ask if anyone had any thoughts. I >>>> did a little searching around on Google, but unfortunately I'm not sure >>>> exactly what to look for either. I don't think Google would take my >>>> message as a search term either. :) >>>> Although I do not have any plans to do this, the advantage of double nat >>>> in this case is I could strap three more routers onto the gateway (SMC) >>>> and have some fun. Now maybe there is a way around all of this, but seems >>>> the current issue is IP6 tunneling, but I am more concerned if this could >>>> pose problems with other services. So, thoughts welcome and I'll keep >>>> poking around and see what I can learn. The good thing is that all seems >>>> to be working for the most part, so this is not a critical need >>>> situation. Just need to make sure I can vpn into the network at the >>>> office. :) >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "MacVisionaries" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
