Yea, actually I have looked that and would love to have that. This is a network I inherited, it was this way when I got it. If it was mine from the beginning DHCP would have been used (along with RADIUS and etc).
Ryan On Jan 28, 2008, at 8:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Ryan, > > Have you considered using DHCP to manage manually assigned IP > addresses? > It offers the best of both worlds. The IPs are statically mapped to > customers, yet the allocations are managed on the server side, > eliminating > the concern about ongoing maintenance (lost client settings). > Additionally, duplicate IP allocation is prevented. > > ted > > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Ryan Langseth wrote: > >> My thoughts got ahead of my fingers,, it was supposed to say bigger >> and more profitable. >> >> I am looking at it from my standpoint, we have 2000+ customers, 48 >> POPs and yes, all static IP addresses (a mix of internet routable and >> rfc1918). We have 2 full time installers and 2-3 CSRs on during >> business hours. Now, in order to assign an IP address the tech has >> to call in and get one from the CSRs, that can take awhile >> especially >> when we are busy. Assigning and managing IPs is done with a BFS (Big >> %&#ing Spreadsheet), I am guessing you currently use the same method. >> Now we could assign the IP address on the work order, but then you >> have to make sure it gets used, or marked as free if it is a no-go, >> this is more difficult with more people. Also since we have >> multiple >> CSRs we have to have the BFS shared, that causes numerous time >> delays >> when saving, making changes and dealing with conflicts. >> >> Luckily I hardly ever have to deal with the BFS, or IP assignment. >> But I do believe it can be better >> >> Rather than looking at how well it works now, take a look at how it >> will work in the future. If you are ok with what you see, continue >> how you want. I am only expressing my opinion and will not feel bad >> if you do not agree with it. ;) >> >> Ryan >> >> On Jan 28, 2008, at 5:16 PM, Jason Hensley wrote: >> >>> Not sure where the 10+ minutes per install addition for a static IP >>> comes >>> into play. Takes 30 seconds or so to program that in. Yeah, not >>> quite as >>> convenient as DHCP, and you run the risk of duplicate IP's if you >>> get >>> sloppy, but otherwise I see a huge advantage with static. >>> >>> Renumbering, like you mentioned, is also MUCH easier if you have >>> internal >>> privates. I NAT at the headend - not at each tower / POP. Makes >>> management >>> very easy for me. >>> >>> For me, static works, dhcp doesn't. Of course, everyone is >>> different. >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> On >>> Behalf Of Ryan Langseth >>> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 5:12 PM >>> To: WISPA General List >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Private vs Public addresses for end-users >>> >>> There are things like looking at the customer base. >>> >>> 1) are they likely to need incoming connections ( This is mainly >>> for >>> businesses ) >>> 2) are they likely to get a worm and have it start spamming ( I hate >>> trying >>> to track down a spammy machine behind NAT ... its not hard just >>> annoying) >>> 3) are they going to have problems with double NAT, the customers >>> router >>> will be doing nat also. Certain system do not handle that very >>> nicely >>> >>> Frankly I hate using Private IPs for customers at all, I also >>> strongly >>> dislike not doing DHCP unless the customer is paying for that >>> static. >>> Static IP addressing is a PITA if you have to renumber, obivously >>> with >>> privates that problem is largely gone. >>> >>> Depending on where you are doing your NAT, I would suggest if you >>> go that >>> route to do it at your Head End, not at your edge routers. That way >>> you can >>> implement one of the common IDS/IPS systems to find problem >>> customers >>> (virus, etc) . >>> >>> Not doing DHCP, if you plan on being profitable, imo, is also a >>> major >>> mistake. You will end up consuming 10+ minutes of your install >>> techs and >>> CSRs time per install. >>> >>> >>> Ryan >>> >>> On Jan 28, 2008, at 3:37 PM, Ugo Bellavance wrote: >>> >>>> Tom DeReggi wrote: >>>>> whether to give private or public address has nothing to do with >>>>> cost. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Oh, what are the thing to consider exactly? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Ugo Bellavance >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> ---------- >>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> ---------- >>>> >>>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] >>>> >>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>> >>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ---- >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ---- >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
