Static Versus Dynamic(DHCP) IP addresses on Windows 2000/2003 Servers

Hello,

Can anyone tell me why I should use Static or Dynamic IP addresses on
Windows 2000 or Windows 2003 Servers ?
We currently use Dynamic DHCP addresses on most of our servers and I would
like to have arguments to give them static IP adresses.

Thanks,

Frank

Have to admit that I'm boggled as to why one would ever want to use dynamic
IPs on any server or network device. What's *their* justification for doing
so? What's running as the DHCP server? You can't have a dynamic IP assigned
and run a Windows DHCP server (or WINS server) and you ought to be using
Windows DHCP - if you run any services/apps that require port forwarding in
your firewall for inbound access (such as mail) you need statics...etc etc
etc. I can't come up with more ideas here simply because I would never
imagine this argument would come up. :-)


Frank Wijten wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can anyone tell me why I should use Static or Dynamic IP addresses on
> Windows 2000 or Windows 2003 Servers ?
> We currently use Dynamic DHCP addresses on most of our servers and I
> would like to have arguments to give them static IP adresses.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Frank

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
<(E-Mail Removed) ahoo.com> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> etc. I can't come up with more ideas here simply because I would never
> imagine this argument would come up. :-)

That's why I didn't respond. It just seemed like explaining something that
is so obvious, that is becomes hard to explain. A guy could use
reservations in DHCP to simulate static entries, but then it would have been
just as easy to make the actually static to start with.

--

Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com

That is what I didn't mention. We use reservations in DHCP.


"Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
> <(E-Mail Removed) ahoo.com> wrote in
message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > etc. I can't come up with more ideas here simply because I would never
> > imagine this argument would come up. :-)
>
> That's why I didn't respond. It just seemed like explaining something that
> is so obvious, that is becomes hard to explain. A guy could use
> reservations in DHCP to simulate static entries, but then it would have
been
> just as easy to make the actually static to start with.
>
> --
>
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
>

"Frank Wijten" <(E-Mail Removed)_NO_SPAM> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> Hello,
>
> Can anyone tell me why I should use Static or Dynamic IP addresses on
> Windows 2000 or Windows 2003 Servers ?
> We currently use Dynamic DHCP addresses on most of our servers and I would
> like to have arguments to give them static IP adresses.

DHCP and DNS servers require static addresses. You configure their
clients using IP Addresses, not FQDNs This goes for WINS
servers aa well.

It is generally considered a "best practice" to use static IP for
servers. You don't see routers being set up as DHCP clients either.
Network and server monitoring applications will often prefer IP
addresses.

You could set up DHCP reservations for you servers that can use DHCP,
if you want a central place to manage DHCP options for those hosts, while
always retaining the same IP address.

--
Matt Hickman
Latin might be obsolete, but those old Romans weren't dummies.
Robert A. Heinlein (1907 - 1988)
"The Roads Must Roll" c. 1940 (ASF)

You can do that, but what happens if you lose the DHCP Server for some
reason in the middle of the night and then lose all your Servers in a chain
reaction because of it?

Run all "main-line, mission critical" servers with static addresses. Set
them "aside" with Exclusions in DHCP and then statically assign them.

--

Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com


"Frank Wijten" <(E-Mail Removed)_NO_SPAM> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> That is what I didn't mention. We use reservations in DHCP.
>
>
> "Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> > "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
> > <(E-Mail Removed) ahoo.com> wrote in
> message
> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > etc. I can't come up with more ideas here simply because I would never
> > > imagine this argument would come up. :-)
> >
> > That's why I didn't respond. It just seemed like explaining something
that
> > is so obvious, that is becomes hard to explain. A guy could use
> > reservations in DHCP to simulate static entries, but then it would have
> been
> > just as easy to make the actually static to start with.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> > www.wandtv.com
> >
> >
>
>

Phillip Windell wrote:
> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
> <(E-Mail Removed) ahoo.com> wrote in
> message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> etc. I can't come up with more ideas here simply because I would
>> never imagine this argument would come up. :-)
>
> That's why I didn't respond. It just seemed like explaining something
> that is so obvious, that is becomes hard to explain. A guy could use
> reservations in DHCP to simulate static entries, but then it would
> have been just as easy to make the actually static to start with.

Hear, hear! <raises glass>

It is my job to tell the 'network' guys that we want to change to static IP
addresses.
As you will know, it is more difficult to change things than to setup
something new......

"Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> You can do that, but what happens if you lose the DHCP Server for some
> reason in the middle of the night and then lose all your Servers in a
chain
> reaction because of it?
>
> Run all "main-line, mission critical" servers with static addresses. Set
> them "aside" with Exclusions in DHCP and then statically assign them.
>
> --
>
> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> www.wandtv.com
>
>
> "Frank Wijten" <(E-Mail Removed)_NO_SPAM> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > That is what I didn't mention. We use reservations in DHCP.
> >
> >
> > "Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > >
> > > "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
> > > <(E-Mail Removed) ahoo.com> wrote in
> > message
> > > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > > etc. I can't come up with more ideas here simply because I would
never
> > > > imagine this argument would come up. :-)
> > >
> > > That's why I didn't respond. It just seemed like explaining something
> that
> > > is so obvious, that is becomes hard to explain. A guy could use
> > > reservations in DHCP to simulate static entries, but then it would
have
> > been
> > > just as easy to make the actually static to start with.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
> > > www.wandtv.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

OK - so ask them why they used dynamic IPs for servers in the first place
and why they want to keep them, when pretty much everyone in the world
thinks this is a really useless idea. Explain that there are services such
as DNS, DHCP, and WINS that won't work if you have dynamic IPs assigned.
There's just no real downside to using statics as far as I can see it, and
tons of reasons not to use dynamic IPs.

Frank Wijten wrote:
> It is my job to tell the 'network' guys that we want to change to
> static IP addresses.
> As you will know, it is more difficult to change things than to setup
> something new......
>
> "Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> You can do that, but what happens if you lose the DHCP Server for
>> some reason in the middle of the night and then lose all your
>> Servers in a chain reaction because of it?
>>
>> Run all "main-line, mission critical" servers with static addresses.
>> Set them "aside" with Exclusions in DHCP and then statically assign
>> them.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
>> www.wandtv.com
>>
>>
>> "Frank Wijten" <(E-Mail Removed)_NO_SPAM> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> That is what I didn't mention. We use reservations in DHCP.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>
>>>> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
>>>> <(E-Mail Removed) ahoo.com> wrote
>>>> in message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>> etc. I can't come up with more ideas here simply because I would
>>>>> never imagine this argument would come up. :-)
>>>>
>>>> That's why I didn't respond. It just seemed like explaining
>>>> something that is so obvious, that is becomes hard to explain. A
>>>> guy could use reservations in DHCP to simulate static entries, but
>>>> then it would
> have
>>> been
>>>> just as easy to make the actually static to start with.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
>>>> www.wandtv.com

Quite the lively conversation and yes I am using static IP
addresses on my servers simply becausse that's the way
it's supposed to be done. I am however moving a new server
into place with Srv 2003 Std Ed. And although I have
created my DHCP scope and entered my exclusions the opt to
create a reservation for a client does not exist. I also
do not see any options that allow me to go back and make
changes to the DHCP scope such as adding more exclusions.
The System Log shows no problems and the DHCP Authorizes
without issue. Any thoughts? Thanks
>-----Original Message-----
>OK - so ask them why they used dynamic IPs for servers in
the first place
>and why they want to keep them, when pretty much everyone
in the world
>thinks this is a really useless idea. Explain that there
are services such
>as DNS, DHCP, and WINS that won't work if you have
dynamic IPs assigned.
>There's just no real downside to using statics as far as
I can see it, and
>tons of reasons not to use dynamic IPs.
>
>Frank Wijten wrote:
>> It is my job to tell the 'network' guys that we want to
change to
>> static IP addresses.
>> As you will know, it is more difficult to change things
than to setup
>> something new......
>>
>> "Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
>> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> You can do that, but what happens if you lose the DHCP
Server for
>>> some reason in the middle of the night and then lose
all your
>>> Servers in a chain reaction because of it?
>>>
>>> Run all "main-line, mission critical" servers with
static addresses.
>>> Set them "aside" with Exclusions in DHCP and then
statically assign
>>> them.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
>>> www.wandtv.com
>>>
>>>
>>> "Frank Wijten" <(E-Mail Removed)_NO_SPAM> wrote
in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> That is what I didn't mention. We use reservations in
DHCP.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Phillip Windell" <@.> wrote in message
>>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
>>>>>
<(E-Mail Removed) ahoo.com>
wrote
>>>>> in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>> etc. I can't come up with more ideas here simply
because I would
>>>>>> never imagine this argument would come up. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> That's why I didn't respond. It just seemed like
explaining
>>>>> something that is so obvious, that is becomes hard
to explain. A
>>>>> guy could use reservations in DHCP to simulate
static entries, but
>>>>> then it would
>> have
>>>> been
>>>>> just as easy to make the actually static to start
with.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
>>>>> www.wandtv.com
>
>
>.
>