ICS and Static addresses?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob Sisson
  • Start date Start date
B

Bob Sisson

Our Proxy server software died so I got ICS running.

After a few false starts everyone's station is running, email is working and
browsing is once again possible.

QUESTION: Our Printer servers have always had static addresses, so expect
someday DHCP will clash with them.

Is there anyway to tell ICS- DHCP to do something to avoid them?

We LOOKED at Server software, but don't need any server features, and a
workstation serves just fine as a file store and ICS point. We can put the
$400-500 not spent towards backups, tape drives, and more.
 
Its not necessary that you should have DHCP with ICS
enabled.
Have static IPs.
-Nimit
 
In
Bob Sisson said:
Our Proxy server software died so I got ICS running.

After a few false starts everyone's station is running, email is
working and browsing is once again possible.

QUESTION: Our Printer servers have always had static addresses, so
expect someday DHCP will clash with them.

Is there anyway to tell ICS- DHCP to do something to avoid them?

We LOOKED at Server software, but don't need any server features, and
a workstation serves just fine as a file store and ICS point. We can
put the $400-500 not spent towards backups, tape drives, and more.
Click to expand...


ICS is not configurable, unfortunately. The inside NIC gets 192.168.0.1 and
it creates a mini DHCP service dishing a range of 192.168.0.2 to
192.168.0.254, and in no particular order, its random, not like a regular
DHCP server, where its sequential.

So if you have machines configured with static IPs, it a roll of the dice!

I assume you don't have a W2k server available to perform NAT for you? Even
cheaper is a Linksys or Netgear router will do NAT and has a configurable
DHCP service. Linksys is only $39.00 last I heard at Best Buys (I think
there's a rebate or something on them.)

Cheers!

--
Regards,
Ace

Please direct all replies ONLY to the Microsoft public newsgroups
so all can benefit.

This posting is provided "AS-IS" with no warranties or guarantees
and confers no rights.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2003 & 2000, MCSA 2003 & 2000, MCSE+I, MCT, MVP
Microsoft Windows MVP - Active Directory

HAM AND EGGS: A day's work for a chicken;
A lifetime commitment for a pig.
 
Two main choices: Make the printer a DHCP client
and let it get an address from ICS or put it's address
up high in the range ICS gives out, e.g., 192.168.0.250

You cannot (effectively) use another DHCP server with
ICS on the same subnet.

You might also consider "RRAS NAT" since if you have
even one Win2000+ server class machine.

ICS and NAT are basically the same probuct except
NAT is configurable (and has a very few more features,
mostly related to multiple IPs/multiple NICs on either
side.)
 
In
Herb Martin said:
Two main choices: Make the printer a DHCP client
and let it get an address from ICS or put it's address
up high in the range ICS gives out, e.g., 192.168.0.250
Click to expand...

But the random scope may still interfere. I once setup SCO on my network
when I had dialup in an apartment. I used ICS on W2k back then. I thought to
set the SCO box on .200, thinking it would never hit that high. I checked
the other machines (only had 5 clients), and one of them set to DHCP, which
got an address of .186. Go figure. Random!

--
Regards,
Ace

Please direct all replies ONLY to the Microsoft public newsgroups
so all can benefit.

This posting is provided "AS-IS" with no warranties or guarantees
and confers no rights.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2003 & 2000, MCSA 2003 & 2000, MCSE+I, MCT, MVP
Microsoft Windows MVP - Active Directory

HAM AND EGGS: A day's work for a chicken;
A lifetime commitment for a pig.
 
I appreciate all the responses. I would prefer a "Server" rather than a
workstation to perform my gateway (ICS) duties, but the cost is too high.

With 10+ stations on the intranet, I have been told I would need 10 CALs and
that really drives up the cost. I was HOPING that since all I was doing was
running ICS and file sharing I wouldn't need CALS but have been told
elsewise. I can get server (2000, XP, 2003) cheep, but the CALs are another
story.

I have seen a DHCP server program that will run on a workstation, and I will
look into that to see if I can turn off the ICS mini-server, or got with a
router.

Microsoft seems to have left a "hole" in their product line for the SOHO
offices and large technology families. Even SBS is expensive when you need
lots of CALS. SBS might make sense if I wanted Exchange, but we don't use
it.

Bob Sisson
 
In
Bob Sisson said:
I appreciate all the responses. I would prefer a "Server" rather
than a workstation to perform my gateway (ICS) duties, but the cost
is too high.

With 10+ stations on the intranet, I have been told I would need 10
CALs and that really drives up the cost. I was HOPING that since all
I was doing was running ICS and file sharing I wouldn't need CALS but
have been told elsewise. I can get server (2000, XP, 2003) cheep,
but the CALs are another story.

I have seen a DHCP server program that will run on a workstation, and
I will look into that to see if I can turn off the ICS mini-server,
or got with a router.

Microsoft seems to have left a "hole" in their product line for the
SOHO offices and large technology families. Even SBS is expensive
when you need lots of CALS. SBS might make sense if I wanted
Exchange, but we don't use it.

Bob Sisson
Click to expand...

I don;t believe you can turn that off in ICS. I would second the motion to
get an inexpensive router as I mentioned earlier!
:-)

--
Regards,
Ace

Please direct all replies ONLY to the Microsoft public newsgroups
so all can benefit.

This posting is provided "AS-IS" with no warranties or guarantees
and confers no rights.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2003 & 2000, MCSA 2003 & 2000, MCSE+I, MCT, MVP
Microsoft Windows MVP - Active Directory

HAM AND EGGS: A day's work for a chicken;
A lifetime commitment for a pig.
 
But the random scope may still interfere. I once setup SCO on my network
when I had dialup in an apartment. I used ICS on W2k back then. I thought to
set the SCO box on .200, thinking it would never hit that high. I checked
the other machines (only had 5 clients), and one of them set to DHCP, which
got an address of .186. Go figure. Random!
Click to expand...

ICS was said to pick low.
 
Bob Sisson said:
I appreciate all the responses. I would prefer a "Server" rather than a
workstation to perform my gateway (ICS) duties, but the cost is too high.

With 10+ stations on the intranet, I have been told I would need 10 CALs and
that really drives up the cost. I was HOPING that since all I was doing was
running ICS and file sharing I wouldn't need CALS but have been told
elsewise. I can get server (2000, XP, 2003) cheep, but the CALs are another
story.
Click to expand...

Check with someone who knows but I don't believe that
Routing-NAT require ANY CALs.
I have seen a DHCP server program that will run on a workstation, and I will
look into that to see if I can turn off the ICS mini-server, or got with a
router.
Click to expand...

Not easily, perhaps though some hack.
Microsoft seems to have left a "hole" in their product line for the SOHO
offices and large technology families. Even SBS is expensive when you need
lots of CALS. SBS might make sense if I wanted Exchange, but we don't use
it.
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
I appreciate all the responses. I would prefer a "Server" rather than a
workstation to perform my gateway (ICS) duties, but the cost is too high.

With 10+ stations on the intranet, I have been told I would need 10 CALs and
that really drives up the cost. I was HOPING that since all I was doing was
running ICS and file sharing I wouldn't need CALS but have been told
elsewise. I can get server (2000, XP, 2003) cheep, but the CALs are another
story.

I have seen a DHCP server program that will run on a workstation, and I will
look into that to see if I can turn off the ICS mini-server, or got with a
router.

Microsoft seems to have left a "hole" in their product line for the SOHO
offices and large technology families. Even SBS is expensive when you need
lots of CALS. SBS might make sense if I wanted Exchange, but we don't use
it.
Click to expand...

Yep. Bummer. Now go get a router to do this.

Jeff
 
To add to the chorus ... why use a server to perform a function that a $50
router will do and require no CALs at all? :-)

File and printer sharing - yes, a CAL will be required for each workstation
that connects to your server. IANAL but I believe one CAL will cover one
workstation no matter how many connections it makes to your server.

Remember also that each copy of Windows Server comes with 5 CALs included in
the purchase price, so all you need is one more five-pack to cover ten
workstations.
 
In
ICS was said to pick low.
Click to expand...

Actually, not from what I've encountered, unless they've changed the
functionality with the later SPs, which I kind of doubt and haven't read
anything in any of the SP releases.

Ace
 
ICS was said to pick low.
Actually, not from what I've encountered, unless they've changed the
functionality with the later SPs, which I kind of doubt and haven't read
anything in any of the SP releases.
Click to expand...

No, I am willing to believe what you have seen;
I was going by the docs as I never use ICS for
any serious work.
 
In
Herb Martin said:
No, I am willing to believe what you have seen;
I was going by the docs as I never use ICS for
any serious work.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't use it for anything serious as well, especially with AD involved.

Ace
 
Back
Top