KM 363 will not pull an IP address

[TheOwl]

DHCP all the way!!!

I always install machines and then reserve the MAC address within their DHCP server. The beauty of this is that you can nuke the network card settings knowing that when the machine boots back up again, it will still have the same IP address.

Solotime - I am assuming that your machine picked up a 169.254.x.x address. This will happen on just about all equipment when DHCP / BOOTP doesn't get responded to within a certain timeframe. You can get your laptop of desktop to do the exact same thing by simply plugging a network cable from your laptop directly to a desktop or another laptop. Because neither of them host a DHCP / BOOTP service, they will eventually obtain a 169.254.x.x IP address. After they have obtained this IP address, you should then be able to talk between them as they will both be on the 169.254.x.x range, unlike you copier which was the only piece of equipment on that range.

I have sites that I service which have a MAC address whitelist used in conjunction with their DHCP server which only allows computers with a MAC address in that whitelist to actually obtain an IP. The reason this is done is stop rogue computers from being placed on the network which may create a security risk in the event that they are infected with a virus, but can't get an IP address to further spread the virus.

[rrrohan]

I have sites that I service which have a MAC address whitelist used in conjunction with their DHCP server which only allows computers with a MAC address in that whitelist to actually obtain an IP. The reason this is done is stop rogue computers from being placed on the network which may create a security risk in the event that they are infected with a virus, but can't get an IP address to further spread the virus.

Any IT WO consider MAC address white list in a security measure obviously don't know what they are doing.
Nothing stopping a rogue c with static IP causing address conflicts and spreading it virus

[TheOwl]

Any IT WO consider MAC address white list in a security measure obviously don't know what they are doing.
Nothing stopping a rogue c with static IP causing address conflicts and spreading it virus

Even with a static IP address, no access to the network is given as the MAC address has to be registered. But then again, I might not have a clue as to what I am doing...

[rrrohan]

Even with a static IP address, no access to the network is given as the MAC address has to be registered. But then again, I might not have a clue as to what I am doing...

If it just a dhcp it doesn't do anything but dish put address but nothing stopping you assigned a static IP yourself but that bit off topic

[Hansoon]

If it just a dhcp it doesn't do anything but dish put address but nothing stopping you assigned a static IP yourself but that bit off topic

Errr....Huh?

Hans

[rrrohan]

Errr....Huh?

Hans

Well dhcp is optional its up to you if you assign the IP yourself or want it automated

[Hansoon]

Well dhcp is optional its up to you if you assign the IP yourself or want it automated

I prefer making a MAC-reservation in the router for an address outside of the DHCP range. Works all the time flawless for me.

DHCP is very comfortable for workstations and especially mobile units such as laptops without the need to scan to, but IMHO not for MFP's

Hans

[emujo]

You can avoid many headaches by utilizing DHCP/reservation and printing to the host name instead of the IP address. Now you never get duplicate IPs issues. Emujo

[rrrohan]

You can avoid many headaches by utilizing DHCP/reservation and printing to the host name instead of the IP address. Now you never get duplicate IPs issues. Emujo

printing to hostname just adds the chance for DNS issues to cause printing problems tho