192.168.1.8 acceptable IP?

[zorak16]

Hey all quick question about IP rules.

I work at a small ad agency writing copy, but my boss likes to use me for small IT issues as they pop up (I know computers well enough). I have an Excel document that contains the IP addresses for everyone's computer in the building. Everyone is 192.168.0.??, two people have 192.168.1.?? (they are connected to the same network). Everyone is connected physically (ethernet) to the network.

Someone has the IP of 192.168.1.8 (found it via command prompt > "ipconfig")
My boss seems to believe that this is not possible, as IPs must be setup with 50-99 ending.

Is this true? Does it matter? My boss wants me to change the IP so it ends with 80, not 8.

Any help with that would be helpful, although I'm sure I can search this forum for good instructions on changing the IP address. I am more concerned with whether or not this matters.

As a side note, everyone in the building is able to access the internet with no issues.

Thanks in advance all!

 

[zorak16]

The person with 192.168.1.8 has Windows 8, although I do not see that as being an issue. Is there change that it is "08" and command prompt reads it as "8?" I doubt it, but it's worth asking.

 

[abailey]

It depends on how you have your network set up. If you are using a subnet mask of 255.255.255.0 then the last octet (last set of numbers) can be anything between 1 and 254. So .8 is fine. Now it may be that your company has determined that it wants to have all machines between 50 and 99, but that would be there rules, not network rules. What sounds funny are the two computers that have a .1 for the third octet instead of .0 like everyone else. If you are using a subnet mask of 255.255.255.0 then the first three octets identify the network and the last octet identifies the device. This would mean the people with the third octet of .1 are on a different subnet from those on .0 and should not be able to see each other on the network (unless you run through a router).

 

[bill001g]

It would be interesting to see how you managed to get ip in the 192.168.0.x and 192.168.1.x ranges to work on the same network. It is not a common configuration unless you really know what you are doing.

First step is go learn what a subnet mask is and how it relates to usable addresses. This will pretty much answer any question as to which IP work or do not work in a particular network.

The actual IP addresses you select within a subnet do not matter as long as they are unique. Certain ranges are excluding to allow dynamic assignment via DHCP but the actual values are up to the person configuring the network in most cases. This is all related to avoiding duplication of IP the actual usable IP in a subnet is only dependent on the mask.

 

[zorak16]

Thanks for the quick replys. Are there any conditions (subnet) where 50-99 are the only acceptible numbers for the last set of numbers? I am going to schedule a time to look at the 192.168.1 computers and see if they actually are on the same network (also look into other configurations the pc might have).

 

[zorak16]

Also, it almost goes without saying. I did not setup this network. I have only been working in this company for a couple of months. I will be meeting with our IT provider soon, so hopefully then I will know all I need to know about our network.

 

[abailey]

Thanks for the quick replys. Are there any conditions (subnet) where 50-99 are the only acceptible numbers for the last set of numbers? I am going to schedule a time to look at the 192.168.1 computers and see if they actually are on the same network (also look into other configurations the pc might have).

bill001g will probably know this better than me, but when I put the numbers into a subnet calculator I cannot get any mask that would allow for only 50-99 to work.

 

[zorak16]

No worries, just curious. Now I am going to research how to change their IP to 192.168.0.??

For this, would the usual IP renew process work?
The stickied thread in this forum is the only process I know:
1. ipconfig /release
2. go into IP properties and changing from "Obtain automatically" to setting a fake IP (e.g. 111.111.111.111 or w/e)
3. change the IP properties back to "Obtain automatically"
4. ipconfig /renew
5. Restart for safe measure

I would do this for the two users who are 192.168.1.??. Assuming it is the same network, is there any problem that would arise changing it to 192.168.0.?? with these steps?

Once again, thank you both (and the community as a whole) for your helpful replies. This website is a godsend for those seeking IT information.

 

[Chris Scott 84]

If the goal is to simply have the IP addresses 192.168.1.50-99 the only ones assigned via DHCP then you can create a pool of available IP addresses with that range. The DHCP server should only distribute the IP addresses within the range you assign. This is done in the router settings, and the 'how to' would depend on the router model in question, but different vendor models are generally similar in most aspects.

You generally start by assigning a start address, which in this case would be 192.168.0.50, and then set the pool size to 49.

This is assuming that the router also functions as your DHCP server anyway, but you can check that via the ipconfig /all command. I don't see why you would have a dedicated DHCP server if it's not a massive network.

If you do find out how those computers on a different network are somehow able to see each other, even though they aren't connected via a layer 3 device, I'd be grateful if you could let me know. That is going to leave me wondering how that is even possible for a while!

 

[zorak16]

Alright I figured out most of the reason why the two computers were 192.168.1, they are connected wireless. Everyone else with 192.168.0 is connected via Ethernet. Using the instructions from my previous post (/release + /renew), would forcing the IP to 192.168.0 (not .1) work?

 

[ex_bubblehead]

....You generally start by assigning a start address, which in this case would be 192.168.0.50, and then set the pool size to 49....

Close. Should be a pool size of 50, otherwise the pool will end at .98

 

[Chris Scott 84]

Alright I figured out most of the reason why the two computers were 192.168.1, they are connected wireless. Everyone else with 192.168.0 is connected via Ethernet. Using the instructions from my previous post (/release + /renew), would forcing the IP to 192.168.0 (not .1) work?

Is the wireless access point and the wired access point the same device?

....You generally start by assigning a start address, which in this case would be 192.168.0.50, and then set the pool size to 49....

Close. Should be a pool size of 50, otherwise the pool will end at .98

Ah, I always forget to start the count at 0! Thanks for that ex_bubblehead

 

[zorak16]

Networking is not my strong suit . My short time in IT industry mostly involved microsoft Office tech support (lots of Outlook).

I have access to the server room. In there I can see 3 "racks" (I think thats what they are called) which has the storage. There are are several switches being used. There are 3 that look like racks, equipped with dozens of ports with corresponding numbers for each port by each persons computer. Two of the switches are smaller, more conventional switches; they are a NetGer FS116 and a 3com Office Connect Gigabit Switch 8. Also there is a larger device a "Digital Video Recorder" (http://www.starkelectronic.com/spcdvrth.htm). I have no idea what the Video Recorder does. I do not know where the wireless comes from. To my knowledge, switches do not provide wireless networks. I could be profoundly mistaken by that last comment; please educate me .

Connected to one of the server racks is an adapter (looks like a KVM switch) that goes to a monitor/keyboard/mouse setup. What is on the screen is a frozen Apple Interface (you move the mouse and nothing happens, several minutes later you see the indefinete Apple loading icon).

I know it is a bit more than my original question, once again once again once again. Thank you all for your help; I am very appreciative.

 

[zorak16]

Also to Chris Scott,
My original goal was to force the 192.168.1 computers to have 192.168.0

For whatever reason, my boss think it is best that everyone be 192.168.0

The main issue, imo, is that one of the users needs to access a shared folder, she cannot access it because she is 192.168.1 (the sharer is on 192.168.0)
I suppose none of this matters since I can instruct her to only work via wired ethernet. Not ideal, but it will get her what she needs.

I just want to know if forcing it to 192.168.0 will cause network issues with wirelessly connected computers.

Basically I need to find out if the wireless and the wired is the same device.

 

[Chris Scott 84]

Networking is not my strong suit . My short time in IT industry mostly involved microsoft Office tech support (lots of Outlook).

I have access to the server room. In there I can see 3 "racks" (I think thats what they are called) which has the storage. There are are several switches being used. There are 3 that look like racks, equipped with dozens of ports with corresponding numbers for each port by each persons computer. Two of the switches are smaller, more conventional switches; they are a NetGer FS116 and a 3com Office Connect Gigabit Switch 8. Also there is a larger device a "Digital Video Recorder" (http://www.starkelectronic.com/spcdvrth.htm). I have no idea what the Video Recorder does. I do not know where the wireless comes from. To my knowledge, switches do not provide wireless networks. I could be profoundly mistaken by that last comment; please educate me .

Connected to one of the server racks is an adapter (looks like a KVM switch) that goes to a monitor/keyboard/mouse setup. What is on the screen is a frozen Apple Interface (you move the mouse and nothing happens, several minutes later you see the indefinete Apple loading icon).

I know it is a bit more than my original question, once again once again once again. Thank you all for your help; I am very appreciative.

The setup there sounds more complex than I envisioned for a small agency. I was picturing maybe a switch and a hardware firewall with a router/wireless access point multi-device.

You can get wireless switches but they should be obvious in appearance as they have those black aerials sticking out . You can often see a wireless access point connected to the router via an ethernet cable in a wireless network, but this access point may be affixed to a wall with the cable running through trunking.

It does sound like the wireless network is likely a different network device plugged in to one of the switches. The two must be connected via a layer 3 device (layer 3 devices allow for cross-network communication, e.g. 192.168.0.2 can ping 192.168.1.2) The switches themselves can work as a layer 3 device, but that is generally what a router does in a larger network, as well as serve as a DHCP server.

You can try putting in the default gateway ip address for the wired network computers in to a browser URL address bar and see what pops up. I suspect you'll run in to a barrier in the form of a username and password request though, if the network was set up by someone else.

 

[Chris Scott 84]

Also to Chris Scott,
My original goal was to force the 192.168.1 computers to have 192.168.0

For whatever reason, my boss think it is best that everyone be 192.168.0

The main issue, imo, is that one of the users needs to access a shared folder, she cannot access it because she is 192.168.1 (the sharer is on 192.168.0)

<snip>

You'll have to access the router settings (or whatever device both networks connect to) to allow for one network to access another. It's been many months since I last used the CLI commands to configure a router to handle that, but if you can ping the wireless computers from a wired one then you can communicate across the networks, so setting up access to a shared folder should be very possible without having to do that.