site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3d ago (text post)   2246 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for January 5, 2025

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm not certain about what happens when two machines claim to have the same IP, actually

Depends on the IP. If it's so called "local" IP (starts with 10., 192.168 or 172.16.) and they are not on the same local network, then nothing bad, since these addresses specifically designed for such use. If they are on the same local network, there would be trouble, not sure about the exact nature but likely both computers sharing an IP won't be able to properly use it. Usually your OS would scream at you in some way when such thing is detected. Using DHCP server is one of the ways to ensure this thing never happens.

If you have two hosts that have same IP and those are not local IPs then weird things would happen. In general, if you have NAT (which most home users for now should and would have) then outgoing connections should work fine (then again, there's no real reason for a machine used by home user to even have a non-local IP at all) but it's better to avoid that situation completely because things get weird. There are special organizations and protocols aimed at segregating IP space so nobody steps on each other's toes there. As a home user, you probably don't need any of that as the standard setup is to use local IPs for everything inside the home network and only use non-local IP for the main router egress address.

Yeah, I meant two machines on the local network. I've never tried that one before. I unfortunately have first-hand experience with machines on different networks using the same IP addresses, as one of my old employers was too cheap to buy new IPv4 subnets and we squatted on the DoD 22.0.0.0/8 subnet. Our network team had a very fun day when the DoD started using that subnet publicly, or so I heard from my old coworkers (I had left by that time).

DHCP server restarts can cause IP conflicts pretty often, especially if you're running the DHCP server on a small home/office router that doesn't persist state. Windows will specifically warn about the IP conflict, and newer (Win7+) will often try to automatically reregister with your DHCP server if you're not running in static modes; Linux has some optional standards-complaint IP conflict notifiers.

If not corrected, the usual results are inconsistent communication and higher network utilization: network switches will resolve the IP address to physical multiple ports, and this causes packets to be sent many more places than they need, and can sometimes cause TCP connections to go wonky.

((There are exceptions and sometimes even cases where you could use this behavior, but they were always rare and increasingly have been replaced by better solutions.))

DHCP server restarts can cause IP conflicts pretty often, especially if you're running the DHCP server on a small home/office router that doesn't persist state

More fun can be had if there's a rogue DHCP server on the network. Back in the days I did network admining work (a long time ago) I had to deal with such a case - turned out to be a new printer with helpful on-by-default DHCP server, but it took me a lot of frustration to figure it out because I never thought before a printer could do that to me.

What idiot thought it was a good idea to add a DHCP server to a printer? That is peak anti-social.

In an office setting, I know it would take me so much time to try to figure that out. At least in a home setting, it's far easier to remember the answer to "what was the last thing that I (or spouse or kids) attached to the network in the past day or two?"

Yeah that was my question exactly when I finally discovered what happened - who even thought it was a good idea to do this? Thankfully, haven't heard about someone doing that for a long while now.

What idiot thought it was a good idea to add a DHCP server to a printer?

It's probably so you can connect directly to the printer, without needing a router. Of course, it might be smarter to first try to acquire a DHCP lease before starting a DHCP server...

Yeah I think it was some kind of "smart" home solution when not everybody had routers on home network. A bit fuzzy on details now but that might be the idea at least. It had a normal "play nice" mode too, just for some reason it wasn't enabled by default... or maybe somebody switched it for some reason, impossible to know now.

Oh yeah that's a good time too. When I was in college, I worked in the IT department and every so often we had to deal with a student who brought in a router and plugged one of their LAN ports into the campus network. That got your port shut off by the school pretty quickly, and iirc you had to come in and promise to stop using your router to get it turned back on.

Students are something else. I am still ashamed of some of the shenanigans I did as a student, especially after eventually finding myself on the other side (not in an university, thankfully). It's a tough job to run IT in such places.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats