![]() |
Welcome to BroadbanterBanter. You are currently viewing as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today. |
|
uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) (uk.telecom.broadband) Discussion of broadband services, technology and equipment as provided in the UK. Discussions of specific services based on ADSL, cable modems or other broadband technology are also on-topic. Advertising is not allowed. |
|
| Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
![]() When we increased our block of 8 static IP addresses to 16, the base IP changed which caused us a bit of a problem because we weren't told when it was going to happen - all of a sudden our external comms went down and we had to reconfigure firewall, servers, A records etc. Now we require an additional 5 static IP's, our ISP is saying we can't have another block of 8 numbers, we have to go to a block of 32 contiguous numbers - which means our current static IP addresses will be lost again! Our 'static' IPs are changing more often than our dynamic ones ever did! My question - is there a technical reason why we can't have two blocks of static IP addresses? Our ADSL router is a Zyxel Prestige 600 TIA Pete |
#2
| |||
| |||
![]() |
#3
| |||
| |||
![]() "PM" wrote in message ... When we increased our block of 8 static IP addresses to 16, the base IP changed which caused us a bit of a problem because we weren't told when it was going to happen - all of a sudden our external comms went down and we had to reconfigure firewall, servers, A records etc. Now we require an additional 5 static IP's, our ISP is saying we can't have another block of 8 numbers, we have to go to a block of 32 contiguous numbers - which means our current static IP addresses will be lost again! Our 'static' IPs are changing more often than our dynamic ones ever did! My question - is there a technical reason why we can't have two blocks of static IP addresses? Our ADSL router is a Zyxel Prestige 600 TIA Pete There should be no reason why they simply can't just change your /29 allocation to a /28 if you have justification for it. Heaven only knows why they think you need a /27 on an ADSL circuit. Just out of interest, what do you need all those IP's for anyway? Chris. |
#4
| |||
| |||
![]() Can you please tell us why you need all those ip addresses. I am honestly curious and not trying to flame you. bart http://www.meshcode.net "PM" wrote in message ... When we increased our block of 8 static IP addresses to 16, the base IP changed which caused us a bit of a problem because we weren't told when it was going to happen - all of a sudden our external comms went down and we had to reconfigure firewall, servers, A records etc. Now we require an additional 5 static IP's, our ISP is saying we can't have another block of 8 numbers, we have to go to a block of 32 contiguous numbers - which means our current static IP addresses will be lost again! Our 'static' IPs are changing more often than our dynamic ones ever did! My question - is there a technical reason why we can't have two blocks of static IP addresses? Our ADSL router is a Zyxel Prestige 600 TIA Pete |
#5
| |||
| |||
![]() On 2003-12-10, PM wrote: My question - is there a technical reason why we can't have two blocks of static IP addresses? No fundamental technical reason, but it's not normally worth the effort involved for a small block. At present you have 16 addresses, of which some (probably 3 - network, broadcast and the routers IP) will be used by your network infrastructure. If you add another block of 8 then, because they don't join on to the existing range, you'll lose another three IPs so you'll have 24 IP addresses of which 6 are taken up by the system - not a particularly good ratio :-) You'd also have the problem of arranging for the two sections of your network to talk to each other - as they'll now be on different IP ranges some machines won't be able to see others directly. Again, this isn't a major issue and may not even be relevant to you, but it makes things messy and is usually best avoided where possible. If you've recently gone from 8 to 16 addresses then your ISP may well feel that there's no point in giving you another 8 when you'll only be back to them shortly looking for more - you may as well go to 32 now and get it over with for a while. The biggest sticking point you may have is that the ISP needs to route both blocks of IP down your ADSL line. There's nothing imposible about this in principle, but you may find that there aren't systems in place to allow this type of configuration to be entered into their (or BTs) systems. Many ISPs will be allocating this IP to you and configuring your and their routers in a standardised way - it's just not worth their while to do a custom configuration for individual customers until you get to a certain cost point. Smaller ISPs or business orientated (that is, more expensive) ones may be a better bet (though that won't overcome BT limitations if there are any but they may be more imaginative about suggesting other solutions). I'm not sure if there's a BT limitation that prevents the running of two address ranges over one BT supplied ADSL line, I suspect there may be but I'm open to comments. If you are able to persuade the ISP to route the addresses to you, then you may find that your router won't allow two separate ranges of public IPs to be used across it - it may be that it assumes that any additional IP ranges are for the purposes of NAT. I'm not familiar with your router so I can't advise whether this will be a problem for you. Glyn Hint of the day: If you know in advance that you will be making DNS changes in the near future and you have full control of the DNS records then lower the Time To Live value. That way the old values will be removed from DNS caches more quickly than normal at the expense of more DNS traffic. Remember to put the timeouts back to normal afterwards. |
#6
| |||
| |||
![]() "Glyn Grinstead" wrote in message ... On 2003-12-10, PM wrote: My question - is there a technical reason why we can't have two blocks of static IP addresses? No fundamental technical reason, but it's not normally worth the effort involved for a small block. At present you have 16 addresses, of which some (probably 3 - network, broadcast and the routers IP) will be used by your network infrastructure. If you add another block of 8 then, because they don't join on to the existing range, you'll lose another three IPs so you'll have 24 IP addresses of which 6 are taken up by the system - not a particularly good ratio :-) You'd also have the problem of arranging for the two sections of your network to talk to each other - as they'll now be on different IP ranges some machines won't be able to see others directly. Again, this isn't a major issue and may not even be relevant to you, but it makes things messy and is usually best avoided where possible. If you've recently gone from 8 to 16 addresses then your ISP may well feel that there's no point in giving you another 8 when you'll only be back to them shortly looking for more - you may as well go to 32 now and get it over with for a while. The biggest sticking point you may have is that the ISP needs to route both blocks of IP down your ADSL line. There's nothing imposible about this in principle, but you may find that there aren't systems in place to allow this type of configuration to be entered into their (or BTs) systems. Many ISPs will be allocating this IP to you and configuring your and their routers in a standardised way - it's just not worth their while to do a custom configuration for individual customers until you get to a certain cost point. Smaller ISPs or business orientated (that is, more expensive) ones may be a better bet (though that won't overcome BT limitations if there are any but they may be more imaginative about suggesting other solutions). I'm not sure if there's a BT limitation that prevents the running of two address ranges over one BT supplied ADSL line, I suspect there may be but I'm open to comments. If you are able to persuade the ISP to route the addresses to you, then you may find that your router won't allow two separate ranges of public IPs to be used across it - it may be that it assumes that any additional IP ranges are for the purposes of NAT. I'm not familiar with your router so I can't advise whether this will be a problem for you. Glyn Hint of the day: If you know in advance that you will be making DNS changes in the near future and you have full control of the DNS records then lower the Time To Live value. That way the old values will be removed from DNS caches more quickly than normal at the expense of more DNS traffic. Remember to put the timeouts back to normal afterwards. Thanks to all that replied. The reason we need more IP addresses is to have a DMZ so we can VPN to clients' sites - NAT and VPN don't like each other. We need 5 additional addresses, the network and broadcast would take another two so we'd have one spare. There's no fundamental reason why we can't have contiguous addresses, it just makes the firewall more prone to mistakes; also we really don't want to have to reconfigure it all, get our A records changed and so on. Unfortunately we don't configure our router - our ISP does this. I don't know whether this is the sticking point. Unfortunately neither Tech or Sales at the ISP could give me an answer :-( and I picked them because their initial tech support was so good. Praps I'll drop them a mail. Pete |
#7
| |||
| |||
![]() |
#8
| |||
| |||
![]() On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Peter wrote: Doesn't running a website on an in-house server need a fixed IP? I know that in the bast there have been IP translation services around but it doens't look very good for a business. You are right - you can run a site from a dynamic IP using one of the dynamic DNS services. You are also right that it often looks unprofessional. If you want to host such a site on the end of a broadband connection a static IP is a must. That said if you are expecting the site to get at all busy it's generally better to host it with a professional hosting service. Jason Clifford -- JustADSL 1Mb Home ADSL just £31.99 / month http://www.justadsl.com/ Business ADSL from £30/month |
#10
| |||
| |||
![]() On 11 Dec 2003, "PM" wrote: Unfortunately we don't configure our router - our ISP does this. I don't know whether this is the sticking point. Unfortunately neither Tech or Sales at the ISP could give me an answer :-( and I picked them because their initial tech support was so good. Praps I'll drop them a mail. Given you want more, you could just as easily get a second ADSL account from someone else - then you have a reserve as well. Don't have the ISP handling the config and you'll probably be better off anyway. I had been meaning to ask earlier, but now am even more curious - which ISP is it at the moment ? Thanks. Peter M. |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fixed IP Addresses And NAT | Kimball K Kinnison | uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) | 3 | November 24th 03 03:16 PM |
Multiple IP addresses | Treefrog | uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) | 6 | November 14th 03 12:43 PM |
Adding wireless to the ebuyer router | Jim Cheney | uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) | 1 | November 9th 03 10:15 PM |
BT Broadband and static IP addresses | J Houston | uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) | 11 | October 24th 03 08:52 PM |
Adding a wireless connection | Phil Thomas | uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) | 1 | July 6th 03 11:11 AM |