Confusing Lease Times

I'm a wee bit puzzled as to DHCP lease times.

Using IPCONFIG I got the following information;

Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : 04 December 2004 18:02:17
Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : 07 December 2004 18:02:17

My Router howevere gives the following;

IP Address Leased Time Name

192.168.1.11 0:00:22.710 ace

I cannot see any connection between the lease times of both readings.

Geoff Lane

In article Geoff Lane says...
> I'm a wee bit puzzled as to DHCP lease times.
>
> Using IPCONFIG I got the following information;
>
> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : 04 December 2004 18:02:17
> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : 07 December 2004 18:02:17
>
> My Router howevere gives the following;
>
> IP Address Leased Time Name
>
> 192.168.1.11 0:00:22.710 ace
>
> I cannot see any connection between the lease times of both readings.
>
The first tells when the session will end, the other tells you how long
its been running.


--
Conor

America: A democracy so successful, even the Ukranians copy it.

On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:03:15 -0000, Conor <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>> I'm a wee bit puzzled as to DHCP lease times.
>>
>> Using IPCONFIG I got the following information;
>>
>> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : 04 December 2004 18:02:17
>> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : 07 December 2004 18:02:17
>>
>> My Router howevere gives the following;
>>
>> IP Address Leased Time Name
>>
>> 192.168.1.11 0:00:22.710 ace
>>
>> I cannot see any connection between the lease times of both readings.
>>
>The first tells when the session will end, the other tells you how long
>its been running.

This was a reading taken from my router at 21.06 hours on Sat 4 Dec, I
pressed the refresh link on my router web interface;

192.168.1.11 0:00:22.710 ace

This is exactly the same as a few hours ago so I assume is reading
incorrectly somehow.

Geoff Lane

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:09:07 +0000, Geoff Lane
<(E-Mail Removed)> strung together this:

>This is exactly the same as a few hours ago so I assume is reading
>incorrectly somehow.
>
Dunno, but who cares. It all works doesn't it?
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:50:41 +0000, Lurch
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:09:07 +0000, Geoff Lane
><(E-Mail Removed)> strung together this:
>
>>This is exactly the same as a few hours ago so I assume is reading
>>incorrectly somehow.
>>
>Dunno, but who cares. It all works doesn't it?

This bit ain't.

Geoff Lane

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 23:41:57 +0000, Geoff Lane
<(E-Mail Removed)> strung together this:

>This bit ain't.
>
Minor technicality, I've got loads of kit attached to this network and
it all does stange things, as long as it does what I ask it to I'm not
bothered.
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject