Printers: DHCP vs STATIC revisited

  • Thread starter Thread starter David Wood
  • Start date Start date
D

David Wood

I have posted this question before but would like to hear more experiences /
opinions
The question is: should printers use DHCP & hostname or static addresses??

The majority of users seem to believe that static is the holy grail for
printers-except Microsoft who have over 1000 printers using DHCP (Redmond).
At the company I work at there are 100+ printers on DHCP on one site
working ok for 2 years but the management seem to belive this should be
changed to static (pressure from the techies!)

I realise that legacy systems (Unix, Mainframe etc) require a fixed address
since there's no dynamic update but why would anyone need static addresses
any more. Even DNS (internally) is no longer static in the Microsoft Active
Directory structure

Feedback appreciated
 
Lexmark and Xerox are great with DHCP. I have had trouble with HP network
cards (where the hostname get changed to an IP) but have not recently so
they may have fixed the issue with a firmware update.

RICOH has a problem on the MS network getting the hostname registered.
Canon has been hit and miss.

I think the main issue is maintaining the address database. If your
printers never move static works. Just set it up and update when the
printer is retired.

--
Alan Morris
Windows Printing Team
Search the Microsoft Knowledge Base here:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;[ln];kbhowto

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
 
David said:
I have posted this question before but would like to hear more experiences /
opinions
The question is: should printers use DHCP & hostname or static addresses??

The majority of users seem to believe that static is the holy grail for
printers-except Microsoft who have over 1000 printers using DHCP (Redmond).
At the company I work at there are 100+ printers on DHCP on one site
working ok for 2 years but the management seem to belive this should be
changed to static (pressure from the techies!)

I realise that legacy systems (Unix, Mainframe etc) require a fixed address
since there's no dynamic update but why would anyone need static addresses
any more. Even DNS (internally) is no longer static in the Microsoft Active
Directory structure

Feedback appreciated
Click to expand...
I think you really have to look at what is right for you and your
network. If your DHCP and DNS is reliable, and your DHCP server can
update your DNS sever of changes then all should be fine. The issue you
can run into is with having the printer update its own dns record. This
will often fail on an AD network because the DNS server doesn't
automatically trust every device on the network. There are work arounds,
but this has been one issue that I have run into. Also you add the extra
complexity and necessity of relying on DNS. I generally shy away from
using DHCP on any device that is relied on on the network. This includes
servers, printers, and other network appliances. I like knowing exactly
where my devices should be. Keep in mind my experience as far as support
has been mostly on networks with a hand full of printers.

I guess what it comes down to, is that I figure if DNS and/or DHCP go
down or have some strange issue, my printers are one less thing affected
by it. Static is static, end of story. The next best thing would be to
reserve addresses on your DHCP server for your printers. But if you are
going to do this, you might just as well make them static. Especially on
large networks.

Just my thoughts.

Matt
 
Back
Top