Disadvantages (if any) for having the lightweight AP on static IP address?

[Muhammed Adnan]

Hello Experts,

Are there any disadvantages for having the APs on static IP addresses instead of DHCP assigned.

It is understood that DHCP server is not compulsory to assign AP with IP and inform it about the WLC IP through Option 43,

as we can statically configured the IP and WLC IP on the IP which will be retained across reboots.

However are there any unforeseen disadvantages?

[Steven Case · Accepted solution]

Only if you change the network space it resides in before changing the IP address on the AP (even then... it's just annoying to reset).

Remember that, after successfully booting one time, it stores the controller information and all that to be considered before DHCP. So, if it was successful once and you set it to static, then you're good to go.

I always like having DHCP, as I never have the afterthought, "Oh no! I missed one". Static doesn't afford that luxury, and DHCP can have reservations that accomplish the same thing, with the added benefit of that dynamic nature.

So - no real issues, just administrative overhead to track.

[Leo Laohoo]

The only disadvantage with static IP address is "manual intensive". Someone has to assign the correct IP address, subnet mask and default gateway.
Get any of the items wrong and it is double-work.
And then make sure no one assigns the same IP address to two (or more) APs.
In some organization, DHCP is handled by different teams and sometimes there are "barriers" standing in the way. Get a Raspberry Pi and enable DHCP that way is a lot easier (and cheaper).

[marce1000]

 - DHCP address assignment is the preferred method. Static doesn't scale, it involves more work , may lead to errors (duplicates) . etc....

 M.