How does setting a static IP on a mobile device prevent linux router from assigning that IP address?

On 04/12/2017 09:45 AM, Pascal Hambourg wrote:

[snip]

It is fixed but still dynamically assigned, not static.

"address reservation" is what most people say, but the first time I
heard of it was as "static DHCP".

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Is man one of God's blunders, or is God one of man's blunders?"
[Nietzsche]

On 04/12/2017 09:57 AM, mike wrote:

[snip]

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.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Is man one of God's blunders, or is God one of man's blunders?"
[Nietzsche]

Mark Lloyd schreef op Wo 12 Apr 2017 om 13:53:
On 04/12/2017 09:45 AM, Pascal Hambourg wrote:

[snip]

It is fixed but still dynamically assigned, not static.

"address reservation" is what most people say, but the first time I
heard of it was as "static DHCP".

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Is man one of God's blunders, or is God one of man's blunders?"
[Nietzsche]


"Man created God." [Me]

--
\ / http://nieuwsgroepen.tk
------------///-----------------------------
/ \ Bye, BugHunter

In article , Mark Lloyd
wrote:

depends on the router. it's easily changed to anything you want and it
doesn't need to be 192.168/16 either.

The usual subnet for home routers is 192.168.y.0/24 , where 'y' is
different for different routers,

there is no usual.

0 and 1 are very common, but it's not unusual to see 2, 16 or even
10.*.*.* for defaults. i have all of those here.

but has to be the same for all
networked devices.

depends on the host mask and network configuration.

In article , Mark Lloyd
wrote:

he hasn't said *why* he wants this, and quite likely, there's an even
easier solution.

I use address reservation for (non-mobile) computers and networked
printers (*), so I can find them (from another computer) when I want to.
I'm not yet sure why I'd want to do that for a mobile device.

much easier to use dns.

On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 02:54:24 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
wrote:

On 2017-04-12 00:10, Tomos Davies wrote:
How does setting a static IP on a linux Android mobile device prevent the
linux router from assigning that IP address to another device?

It doesn't.

There are three possibilities, though.

a) You accidentally assigned your phone an IP outside of the range
your router uses for DHCP addresses. Ie, the range dedicated to manually
given fixed addresses.

b) You accidentally assigned your phone the same IP as the router had
given it by DHCP.

c) You happen to have a router that before assigning an IP, first
pings that IP to see if it responds, then automatically removes that IP
from the pool of addresses it can give.

D) you dont have enough devices for the router to get around to trying
to hand out the one you have used.....

FWIW most home routers seem pretty brain dead for the optional
subtleties in the DHCP server standards - several types i have used
will merrily hand out the same IP address that is in use by a device
after a reboot.



You should make sure that 'a' is true.
Stephen Hope
Replace xyz with ntl to reply

nospam wrote:
In article , Frank Slootweg
wrote:

he hasn't said *why* he wants this, and quite likely, there's an even
easier solution.

He *has* said why he wants/needs this - a fixed ip address on his
phone while at home

that's not a why.

Duh! I said "He *has* said". I.e. you said he hasn't, I say he has.

The "a fixed ip address on his phone while at home" is an elaboration
of "this", because it would be silly to talk about "this" if it isn't
clear what "this" refers to. You might want to look up the concept of
'context'.

he has not stated the problem he needs to solve and has demonstrated
that he knows very little about networking.

He *has* stated the problem he needs to solve. And you'd better worry
about your reading/comprehension problems than about his alleged lack of
networking knowledge.

his *guess* is that a static ip is the solution without realizing all
the problems it will cause for both himself and others.

There's no 'guessing' involved. A static IP *is* the solution.

-, but as usual you spout all kind of ********
without even knowing what the problem is.

he never said what the problem is, so nobody, including you, has any
idea.

He *has* said what the problem is. Sofar the only one having no idea
is you.

And yes, his want/need *is* a
legitimate one.

no it isn't.

there is no valid reason why a *phone* needs a static ip address.

In your uninformed/pig-headed opinion.

To compensate for your extreme clue-resistance, I'll give you two
clue-by-fours:

- It's common to describe a problem where?

- It's irrelevant that it's a phone. It has exactly nothing to do with
the device being a phone. He actually *first* uses the term "device"
several times, before he talks about "phone".

In article , Frank Slootweg
wrote:


his *guess* is that a static ip is the solution without realizing all
the problems it will cause for both himself and others.

There's no 'guessing' involved. A static IP *is* the solution.

no it definitely is *not*. a static ip *will* cause problems, both for
him *and* others.

the solution is to use reserved dhcp, or ideally, dns and let the
router deal with the ip management.

nospam wrote:
In article , Frank Slootweg
wrote:

his *guess* is that a static ip is the solution without realizing all
the problems it will cause for both himself and others.

There's no 'guessing' involved. A static IP *is* the solution.

no it definitely is *not*. a static ip *will* cause problems, both for
him *and* others.

the solution is to use reserved dhcp, or ideally, dns and let the
router deal with the ip management.

You seem to think that your use of terms is some kind of standard.
Guess what, it isn't!

These terms are ambiguous, so when using them, you should explain what
*you* mean by them.

For example you say that a "static IP" is not the solution and that
one should use "Static DHCP" instead (which, as you say, is a misnomer).

But what you call "Static DHCP" is called "Static DHCP IP" (note the
addition of " IP"!) on my router.

Since "Static DHCP" is a contradiction in terms, is it so silly to say
"Static IP" when the actual setting in some router is "Static DHCP IP"?
No, of course it isn't, because it leaves out the silly contradiction in
terms. That the static IP is probably managed by the same function which
also assigns dynamic IPs is totally irrelevant.

So now we have your terms "Reserved DHCP"/"Static DHCP", which are
exactly the same as my term "Static IP", but yet you claim that your
solution is the right one and mine is the wrong one, which is a tad
strange for one and the same solution.

QED.

On 04/12/2017 01:51 PM, nospam wrote:

[snip]

reserved dhcp is sometimes called static dhcp, perhaps causing the
confusion. that's technically a contradiction, but it's not unusual to
see it called that.

It's a static (constant, doesn't change) IP. It's just the DHCP server,
rather than the client device, that keeps it static.

https://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Static_DHCP



--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Is man one of God's blunders, or is God one of man's blunders?"
[Nietzsche].

On 04/12/2017 02:08 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Mark Lloyd
wrote:

he hasn't said *why* he wants this, and quite likely, there's an even
easier solution.

I use address reservation for (non-mobile) computers and networked
printers (*), so I can find them (from another computer) when I want to.
I'm not yet sure why I'd want to do that for a mobile device.

much easier to use dns.


I do that too. The server (LAN only) here is called "gary.lan". In case
there's a problem with DNS, It doesn't hurt to know the IP too.

Also, I find my network printer is easier to access on a constant IP.

There's also my original problem (ReplayTV), which is how I got started
with static DHCP.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Is man one of God's blunders, or is God one of man's blunders?"
[Nietzsche]

On 04/12/2017 04:29 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

[snip]

Since "Static DHCP" is a contradiction in terms,

Static IP served by DHCP. Doesn't sound like a contradiction.

"static DHCP" could also apply to a DHCP server that supplies ONLY
static IPs. I have used software like that before, although you probably
will NOT find it on your router.

[snip]

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Is man one of God's blunders, or is God one of man's blunders?"
[Nietzsche]

In article , Frank Slootweg
wrote:

his *guess* is that a static ip is the solution without realizing all
the problems it will cause for both himself and others.

There's no 'guessing' involved. A static IP *is* the solution.

no it definitely is *not*. a static ip *will* cause problems, both for
him *and* others.

the solution is to use reserved dhcp, or ideally, dns and let the
router deal with the ip management.

You seem to think that your use of terms is some kind of standard.
Guess what, it isn't!

guess what. the use is standard.

These terms are ambiguous,

they are not in any way ambiguous. they are well defined networking
terms.

so when using them, you should explain what
*you* mean by them.

no need. they are industry standard terms.

For example you say that a "static IP" is not the solution and that
one should use "Static DHCP" instead (which, as you say, is a misnomer).

correct. static dhcp is the proper solution.

But what you call "Static DHCP" is called "Static DHCP IP" (note the
addition of " IP"!) on my router.

dhcp assigns ips, so calling it 'static dhcp ip' is redundant and
doesn't change anything.

Since "Static DHCP" is a contradiction in terms,

technically yes, but it's commonly used and understood what is meant.

is it so silly to say
"Static IP" when the actual setting in some router is "Static DHCP IP"?

not only silly, but it's stupid because the term 'static ip' means
something completely different than 'static dhcp ip'.

using them interchangeably would be an incredibly bad idea.

what's silly is the term 'static d(ynamic) hcp', but many people call
it that and it has become common usage. call it reserved dhcp if you
prefer a less silly term, but expect to see static dhcp used to mean
the same thing. it's just how it is.

No, of course it isn't, because it leaves out the silly contradiction in
terms.

static dhcp ip still has the contradiction. just what do you think the
'd' in dhcp stands for?

That the static IP is probably managed by the same function which
also assigns dynamic IPs is totally irrelevant.

nope. it's very relevant.

static ip is configured on the device.
static dhcp/reserved dhcp is configured on the router, as is standard
(non-reserved) dhcp.

So now we have your terms "Reserved DHCP"/"Static DHCP", which are
exactly the same as my term "Static IP",

no they definitely are not the same.

you're using the term 'static ip' incorrectly. it is in no way the same
as reserved dhcp/static dhcp.

but yet you claim that your
solution is the right one and mine is the wrong one, which is a tad
strange for one and the same solution.

the only thing strange is that you're insisting your incorrect usage is
valid. it isn't.

actually that's not all that strange, since you do that a lot.

In article , Mark Lloyd
wrote:

Since "Static DHCP" is a contradiction in terms,

Static IP served by DHCP. Doesn't sound like a contradiction.

just what do you think the 'd' in dhcp stands for? hint: dynamic.

expanding it gives: static dynamic host configuration protocol, which
is a contradiction.

"static DHCP" could also apply to a DHCP server that supplies ONLY
static IPs. I have used software like that before, although you probably
will NOT find it on your router.

a static ip by definition is not handed out by a dhcp server. it's
configured on the device.

In article , Mark Lloyd
wrote:

reserved dhcp is sometimes called static dhcp, perhaps causing the
confusion. that's technically a contradiction, but it's not unusual to
see it called that.

It's a static (constant, doesn't change) IP. It's just the DHCP server,
rather than the client device, that keeps it static.

it's dynamically assigned. it's just that the dhcp server reserves the
same one each time.