thats why we put in wireless in all our buildings..moving around is no 
problem...

Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:

>Darrell Newcomb wrote:
>
>>Because pre-W2K windows didn't automatically try to renew a
>>lease when the
>>ethernet interface comes back up after being down.  So...if the
>>old lease
>>hadn't come up for renewal during the time the machine moved
>>from point A to
>>B.....the users don't automatically get connectivity.
>>
>
>Plus with laptops, the user expects to not have to reboot. They may just
>move from building to building without shutting down the laptop. It might go
>to sleep, but you should just be able to hit a button and keep working. It
>seems like a reasonable user expectation, but alas, we as networkers haven't
>done a good job in this area. (at least with IP)
>
>The technical issue is that the user is in a different subnet and needs a
>new IP address and default gateway after moving to a new building, location,
>whatever.
>
>Priscilla
>
>>Lots of options to teach the helpdesk how to educate
>>users....but since it
>>'worked before' in Chuck's case it's seen as a (big?)
>>problem(PITA).
>>
>>""Larry Letterman""  wrote in message
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>>>why is that ? we have segmented avvid network across our
>>>
>>campus. The
>>
>>>laptops are all W2K and they work just
>>>fine without any issues on DHCP...The routers are all running
>>>
>>hsrp and
>>
>>>work correctly..
>>>
>>>Chuck's Long Road wrote:
>>>
>>>>I see I should have made this one a "Friday Folly" :->
>>>>
>>>>In a Big Flat Bridged Network, a mobile user unplugs the
>>>>
>>laptop at one
>>
>>>>office, drives over to the next office, plugs back in, and
>>>>
>>no further
>>action
>>
>>>>is required. The Windoze PC has retained it's IP address,
>>>>
>>and the network
>>
>>>>doesn't care about location, because it is one big flat
>>>>
>>network.
>>
>>>>However, in the brand new ATM based AVVID ready routed
>>>>
>>network, said
>>mobile
>>
>>>>user is now in a different segment in each location. With
>>>>
>>Windoze, you
>>have
>>
>>>>to manually intervene. Sometimes you have to release the IP
>>>>
>>address,
>>reload
>>
>>>>the computer, and then get your new DHCP assignment. Users
>>>>
>>don't like
>>this.
>>
>>>>After all, now they have to do something, whereas before
>>>>
>>they did not.
>>Never
>>
>>>>mind the higher speed, the failover capability of the
>>>>
>>routers, the new
>>100
>>
>>>>mbs switches rather than 10mbs. They have to take an extra
>>>>
>>step or two in
>>
>>>>order to log in.
>>>>
>>>>This is normal behaviour for Windoze machines, and maybe for
>>>>
>>DHCP clients
>>in
>>
>>>>general. I have had to do this release / renew for years.
>>>>
>>>>But to the customer, who is pretty naive in terms of
>>>>
>>networking, there is
>>a
>>
>>>>"problem" that was caused by the new routers.  To the users,
>>>>
>>there is a
>>
>>>>problem that never existed before.
>>>>
>>>>Like I said, serves me right. You give a customer a great
>>>>
>>new network,
>>and
>>
>>>>you break something so rudimentary that it never would have
>>>>
>>occurred
>>
>>>>otherwise. :->
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>
>>>>www.chuckslongroad.info
>>>>like my web site?
>>>>take the survey!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>""Priscilla Oppenheimer""  wrote in message
>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>>
>>>>>Spare us the mystery and tell us what you're getting at.
>>>>>
>>:-) Did  you
>>
>>>>forget
>>>>
>>>>>to tell the DHCP server to provide the correct default
>>>>>
>>gateway address
>>to
>>
>>>>>the PCs? That's my guess, since you say everything else
>>>>>
>>like helper
>>
>>>>>addresses, etc. is configured correctly.  Just a late-night
>>>>>
>>theory,
>>
>>>>waiting
>>>>
>>>>>for Jay Leno to come on.....
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>Priscilla
>>>>>
>>>>>Chuck's Long Road wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>The AVVID solution I sold a few months ago is gong through
>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>This project has been problematic for a lot of reasons, so
>>>>>>
>>it
>>
>>>>>>is not unusual
>>>>>>for a round of e-mails from the customer complaining about
>>>>>>
>>one
>>
>>>>>>thing or
>>>>>>another.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Today was a good one, however. Shows to go you have to ask
>>>>>>things you
>>>>>>normally wouldn't think about.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>DHCP - no big deal. Works fine. All of us have probably
>>>>>>
>>used it
>>
>>>>>>or
>>>>>>configured it. All of us probably have experience with
>>>>>>
>>running
>>
>>>>>>several small
>>>>>>sites off a single DHCP server at a central site.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So why is the customer complaining about DHCP not working,
>>>>>>
>>and
>>
>>>>>>it's because
>>>>>>our routers are screwed up and Microsoft told them that
>>>>>>
>>they
>>
>>>>>>would have to
>>>>>>change their network addressing to a single class B rather
>>>>>>
>>than
>>
>>>>>>subnets of
>>>>>>/16 space, the way I designed it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The routers are configured correctly. The network is
>>>>>>
>>designed
>>
>>>>>>correctly - no
>>>>>>overlapping subnets. IP helpering is configured correctly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Problem occurs with several users, different NIC's, either
>>>>>>Win2K or WinXP.
>>>>>>No one common factor. Worked just fine before we put the
>>>>>>
>>new
>>
>>>>>>routers in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Recognizing that Microsoft is full of C**P and their TCP
>>>>>>
>>stack
>>
>>>>>>is S**T,
>>>>>>still, why the problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Gee, what happens to DHCP when you go from a single flat
>>>>>>bridged network to
>>>>>>a segmented routed network? Especially to mobile users, who
>>>>>>travel from site
>>>>>>to site for various reasons on a regular basis?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Serves me right
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Chuck
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>
>>>>>>www.chuckslongroad.info
>>>>>>like my web site?
>>>>>>take the survey!
>>>>>>
>>>--
>>>
>>>Larry Letterman
>>>Network Engineer
>>>Cisco Systems Inc.
-- 

Larry Letterman
Network Engineer
Cisco Systems Inc.




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=54510&t=54402
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to