Anyone care to try to explain this IP conundrum?

[blackcat4866]

It's a new network install. The old printer was at 10.0.0.3 and plugged into a router, and I assigned the same address to the KM C25. When I plugged in the laptop to the same router I was assigned 169.254.188.3

When I ran NetScan the only thing I could find on the 169. 254.188... range was my laptop. When I ran the 10.0.0... range I got nothing, even with the printer connected. The printer did ping, and I could access Pagescope. I loaded the driver to my laptop and successfully printed.

The clients were connected wirelessly to a different wireless router. Two Win7 PCS, 10.0.0.5 and 10.0.0.24. Neither would ping my laptop or the printer. I loaded the drivers. Naturally discovery would not find the printer, but I assigned an address. It still would not print, ping or access Pagescope.

What's going on here? The Dell communicated just fine on 10.0.0.3 so why would it not work on the KM? Does the wireless router look for a specific MAC address? I know I haven't provided much information, but that's about all I could figure out. =^..^=

[Ikon Princess]

Don't know if this will help but with my limited knowledge here goes. The 169.254.x.x means that the dhcp server has failed, apipa (automatic private ip addressing) ip address ranges are 169.254.0.1 to 169.254.255.254. The subnet should be 255.255.0.0. A private class A address scheme is between 10.0.0.0 to 10.255.255.255 with a gateway of 255.0.0.0. If it were me I would call their IT department. I am only halfway to my A+ and this is as far as I have learned yet, hope it turns a light bulb on for you or someone else here.

[blackcat4866]

I can confirm that the assigned address to the laptop was subnet: 255.255.0.0 gateway same as IP
My laptop did not pick up a domain, DNS1 or DNS2, or WINS.

On the clients the subnet was: 255.255.255.0

I don't know if this confirms or contradicts ...
Thanks for your comments. =^..^=

[Shadow]

you will need to see if the 10.0.0.3 IP was assigned with the mac reservation. it could be that their IT guy/gal set it up that way even though there is a static IP address assigned to the machine.
can you access their router and see for your self?
you might have to get their IT involved to assist in sorting this out.

[blackcat4866]

I did advise the customer to involve their own IT. I'm fairly good at identifying my own limitations.

Thanks for the explanation. It makes sense. So the MAC address has to match up ... =^..^=

[Shadow]

yes, if the mac address does not match it will be placed in a sand box with nothing to do.
some it companies us this as a way of preventing a customer from changing their equipment with out their involvement.
they use it as a way of extra billing to the client for tech support outside of the "normal" services.

[Mr Spock]

If they have two routers they may be giving out different network address or all machines maybe static. Also the routers may not talk to each other as well.

[ddude]

I did advise the customer to involve their own IT. I'm fairly good at identifying my own limitations.

Yes, this is where the answer will lie.

• Mr Spock
  
  Re: Anyone care to try to explain this IP conundrum?
  If they have two routers they may be giving out different network address or all machines maybe static. Also the routers may not talk to each other as well.
• 3 Hours Ago
  Shadow
  
  Re: Anyone care to try to explain this IP conundrum?
  yes, if the mac address does not match it will be placed in a sand box with nothing to do.
  some it companies us this as a way of preventing a customer from changing their equipment with out their involvement.
  they use it as a way of extra billing to the client for tech support outside of the "normal" services.

The problem does seem to be a hierarchy issue, an outside IP assigner vs an inside IP assigner.....

[TheOwl]

Ikon Princess is just about spot on in regards to 169.254.x.x addressing.

You did say that you could ping and talk to the machine though which is technically impossible between a 169.254.x.x address to a 10.0.0.x address unless there is a gateway available for the translation such as a PC on the network with two NIC's, one assigned on the 10.0.0.x range and another on the 169.254.x.x range.

Just by chance, did you do an ipconfig /all on your laptop when you had it plugged into the network? And when you had it plugged into the network, was your wireless card enabled? If you do an ipconfig /all, you will get all the NIC information from all of your NIC's and you may have done whatI have done in the past and looked at the wrong NIC.

Other things that can be done on a network that could hinder your progress:

MAC Filter list for DHCP - I have setup a couple of networks like this which prevents anything other than the listed MAC addresses in the filter list from obtaining an IP via the DHCP server. This gets implemented on a network where you don't want users brining in their own equipment and putting them on the network.

Switch configurations - Switches can also be configured to divert or deny certain traffic on the network. Another thing that can be configured in the switches is VLAN's (Virtual Local Area Network) which basically allows you to run multiple subnets through your switch gear, but also keep those subnets separate so that two different lots of subnet traffic never meet or get confused so to speek with other traffic on the network.

Gateways - The network may have a specific gateway that does wireless to wired network routing. While highly unlikely in this day in age due to better wireless routers, it could be a possibility.

Subnet - Depending on the subnet in use, could stop traffic from talking to addresses. Just make sure that the subnets on the PC's match the subnet on the copier.

Does the copier pick up an IP address via DHCP if you enable it on the copier? If it doesn't, then I would say that there is a MAC filter list via the DHCP server or from something else which just denies traffic period unless the MAC address is set to an allow state from what ever is blocking the traffic.

[blackcat4866]

Lots of great questions! I'll try to answer as many as I can:

Ikon Princess is just about spot on in regards to 169.254.x.x addressing. ...

... Does the copier pick up an IP address via DHCP if you enable it on the copier? If it doesn't, then I would say that there is a MAC filter list via the DHCP server or from something else which just denies traffic period unless the MAC address is set to an allow state from what ever is blocking the traffic.

The MFP also picked up a 169.254.188.xxx address. I don't think I read it wrong or imagined it this time. The wireless network for this customer is secured, and I had enough problems without introducing another.

You did say that you could ping and talk to the machine though which is technically impossible between a 169.254.x.x address to a 10.0.0.x address unless there is a gateway available for the translation such as a PC on the network with two NIC's, one assigned on the 10.0.0.x range and another on the 169.254.x.x range.

Yeah, I thought is was unlikely-to impossibly, myself, but alas I was able to ping and reach Pagescope across the void.

Just by chance, did you do an ipconfig /all on your laptop when you had it plugged into the network? And when you had it plugged into the network, was your wireless card enabled? If you do an ipconfig /all, you will get all the NIC information from all of your NIC's and you may have done whatI have done in the past and looked at the wrong NIC.

Without entering the password for a secure connection, no IP should be assigned, correct? I must say that this is one of the most bizarre networks I've ever looked at. A wireless router connected to a wired router, and a printer plugged into the wired router: does that make any sense? There are only two PCs, so why bother with wireless? They're all within 15 ft of the router(s). And when I did the ipconfig/all on the customers Win7 laptop I saw some unexpected IPv6 values. Is anyone using IPv6 yet? This will be the first time for me. Could both IPv4 and IPv6 be running simultaneously?

MAC Filter list for DHCP - I have setup a couple of networks like this which prevents anything other than the listed MAC addresses in the filter list from obtaining an IP via the DHCP server. This gets implemented on a network where you don't want users brining in their own equipment and putting them on the network.

Me too. This one is my guess, but it leaves a lot of other thinks unexplained.

Switch configurations - Switches can also be configured to divert or deny certain traffic on the network. Another thing that can be configured in the switches is VLAN's (Virtual Local Area Network) which basically allows you to run multiple subnets through your switch gear, but also keep those subnets separate so that two different lots of subnet traffic never meet or get confused so to speek with other traffic on the network.

No switches. Could the other router be re-configured to serve some other purpose?

Gateways - The network may have a specific gateway that does wireless to wired network routing. While highly unlikely in this day in age due to better wireless routers, it could be a possibility.

Both functions on one router .. OK, I get that. But two routers?

Subnet - Depending on the subnet in use, could stop traffic from talking to addresses. Just make sure that the subnets on the PC's match the subnet on the copier.

169.254.188.3
255.255.0.0
169.254.188.3

10.0.0.3
255.255.255.0
10.0.0.1

Isn't the first class B, and the second class C? Nope. I'm just as confused as when I started. =^..^=