Page 1 of 1
[1.5.9 & 1.5.10] DHCP Wrong Ips
Posted: Wed May 29, 2013 11:41 am
by Swimmer
Hello all,
I'm using 1.5.9 and my DHCP is:
Code: Select all
LAN DHCP Server Enabled
DHCP range:
Start: 192.168.2.100
End: 192.168.2.200
Lease Time: 6 (hours)
But the router (tplink1043) is giving the following IPs 192.168.0.x.
What can I do to prevent this?
Re: [1.5.9&1.5.10] DHCP Wrong Ips
Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 11:47 am
by Swimmer
Hello,
I'm having the same problem with 1.5.10
My router internal ip is 192.168.2.1
My sub-mask is 255.255.0.0
My router DHCP is giving 192.168.0.x IPs
How can I force the IPs on 192.168.2.x as configured in DHCP?
Re: [1.5.9 & 1.5.10] DHCP Wrong Ips
Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:03 pm
by Swimmer
Found the problem.
In Gargoyle, the DHCP webconfig is misleading:
Start IP it really isn't the first IP.
When using the submask 255.255.0.0, the IP 192.168.0.0 is the first IP.
In the box "Start IP", we need to enter the first IP from 192.168.0.0 til the one that we want, in this case 192.168.2.150.
We need to enter in "Start IP(192.168.2.150)" the number 662 as first IP, this IP is 256+256+150.
We need to enter in "End IP(192.168.2.200)" the number 712 as last IP, this IP is 256+256+150+50.
Re: [1.5.9 & 1.5.10] DHCP Wrong Ips
Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2013 4:11 pm
by Eric
It's true that the current DHCP interface doesn't really handle subnets with more than 256 IPs in them very well. The reason that was never implemented is that I know of no routers that run Gargoyle that can handle the traffic generated by more 200+ computers, let alone more than that.
Mat I ask why you need such a large subnet? It may be there's a use-case I'm not thinking of, and fixing this should be a priority. Otherwise it's a sanity check... "Hold on, HOW many devices do you have...?"
Re: [1.5.9 & 1.5.10] DHCP Wrong Ips
Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2013 6:12 pm
by Swimmer
The devices are few, the network is small but I like to segment it...
Main internet connection is in: 192.168.1.1
Group A has network in the entire 192.168.2.x
Group B has network in the entire 192.168.3.x
etc..
I want to leave the 192.168.1.x network for network devices only such as ISP, routers, wireless, printers, etc...
I prefer this type of network segmentation than groups inside 192.168.1.x.
I'm open to suggestions.