Other advantages of having a static IP?

[R.J. MacReady]

My small business used to run it's own Exchange Mail server. So a static IP was needed.
But my sever guy has switched us over to Microsoft Office 365. So I don't need a static IP anymore.

In the coming months my house will be all steaming TV, (cable is gone) and a bunch of IP security cameras. (some HD)

The static IP is part of a business account with Verizon, the extra cost is about 60 bucks a month if I don't switch to a dynamic IP (residential account)

All said, is there any real advantage to having a static IP for a house that will be going all in with lots IP devices and bandwidth?

Thanks for any help.

 

[WizardHawk]

My small business used to run it's own Exchange Mail server. So a static IP was needed.
But my sever guy has switched us over to Microsoft Office 365. So I don't need a static IP anymore.

In the coming months my house will be all steaming TV, (cable is gone) and a bunch of IP security cameras. (some HD)

The static IP is part of a business account with Verizon, the extra cost is about 60 bucks a month if I don't switch to a dynamic IP (residential account)

All said, is there any real advantage to having a static IP for a house that will be going all in with lots IP devices and bandwidth?

Thanks for any help.

Static vs dynamic has nothing to do with how your service will perform with a big load on it.

The reason to get static is only if you need it for DNS purposes and it doesn't sound like you do. Mostly home users have no need for it.

Even if you had a security system that streamed from it you would probably be able to setup something called DDNS which still lets you access your home machine even with dynamic IP.

Getting rid of it won't do a thing to you if you aren't doing web/email service for that location.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

Static vs dynamic has nothing to do with how your service will perform with a big load on it.

The reason to get static is only if you need it for DNS purposes and it doesn't sound like you do. Mostly home users have no need for it.

Even if you had a security system that streamed from it you would probably be able to setup something called DDNS which still lets you access your home machine even with dynamic IP.

Getting rid of it won't do a thing to you if you aren't doing web/email service for that location.

Thanks for the info ..much appreciated.

..and it does not add any extra security in any way correct?

 

[WizardHawk]

Thanks for the info ..much appreciated.

..and it does not add any extra security in any way correct?

No, not really. Mostly. Lol

I don't want to get too technical, but with dynamic IP's you can (on some ISP's) be placed one more layer away from the internet which means another layer of what is called NAT. This allows those ISP's to have several users that appear to have the exact same address to the public internet. I don't know how much of that happens anymore, but in theory it would mean you and the other customers sharing that address are on the same network, but even then it doesn't place you in more danger because your local router creates yet another layer and a different translation so I doubt anyone has ever been hacked on a shared IP before.

Say you are with Comcast. All of your neighbors that have them are sharing the same node and in some cases you could (probably not much anymore, but I haven't checked into it) be on the same subnet at Comcast that you all share going out to the internet. But your router in your home would distance you from all of them.

If you were running the kinds of apps that needed to be mapped so that programs going to that outside address needed to be mapped to a specific machine in your internal network, you would know and even then it probably would still work with DDNS.

So, if you don't know you need a static you almost certainly don't need it and shouldn't have any difference in performance or security.

All of my branch locations have static IP's because we are running VPN's and need to directly address them, otherwise we wouldn't care and would have dynamic. I have dynamic at home and have no difference in performance.

 

[williewilliejuan]

Fight, fight, fight!!!!!

 

[R.J. MacReady]

No, not really. Mostly. Lol

I don't want to get too technical, but with dynamic IP's you can (on some ISP's) be placed one more layer away from the internet which means another layer of what is called NAT. This allows those ISP's to have several users that appear to have the exact same address to the public internet. I don't know how much of that happens anymore, but in theory it would mean you and the other customers sharing that address are on the same network, but even then it doesn't place you in more danger because your local router creates yet another layer and a different translation so I doubt anyone has ever been hacked on a shared IP before.

Say you are with Comcast. All of your neighbors that have them are sharing the same node and in some cases you could (probably not much anymore, but I haven't checked into it) be on the same subnet at Comcast that you all share going out to the internet. But your router in your home would distance you from all of them.

If you were running the kinds of apps that needed to be mapped so that programs going to that outside address needed to be mapped to a specific machine in your internal network, you would know and even then it probably would still work with DDNS.

So, if you don't know you need a static you almost certainly don't need it and shouldn't have any difference in performance or security.

All of my branch locations have static IP's because we are running VPN's and need to directly address them, otherwise we wouldn't care and would have dynamic. I have dynamic at home and have no difference in performance.

A wealth of info Hawk, Thank you.

 

[Roy Munson]

No, not really. Mostly. Lol

I don't want to get too technical, but with dynamic IP's you can (on some ISP's) be placed one more layer away from the internet which means another layer of what is called NAT. This allows those ISP's to have several users that appear to have the exact same address to the public internet. I don't know how much of that happens anymore, but in theory it would mean you and the other customers sharing that address are on the same network, but even then it doesn't place you in more danger because your local router creates yet another layer and a different translation so I doubt anyone has ever been hacked on a shared IP before.

Say you are with Comcast. All of your neighbors that have them are sharing the same node and in some cases you could (probably not much anymore, but I haven't checked into it) be on the same subnet at Comcast that you all share going out to the internet. But your router in your home would distance you from all of them.

If you were running the kinds of apps that needed to be mapped so that programs going to that outside address needed to be mapped to a specific machine in your internal network, you would know and even then it probably would still work with DDNS.

So, if you don't know you need a static you almost certainly don't need it and shouldn't have any difference in performance or security.

All of my branch locations have static IP's because we are running VPN's and need to directly address them, otherwise we wouldn't care and would have dynamic. I have dynamic at home and have no difference in performance.

I will say the hardware I get from Comcast Business is way better than the crap they gave me when I was on consumer comcast. It also gives me finer grain port control per Static IP on the Port Management page. The consumer hardware was so bad that I just bought my own modem and separate router.

There's also a difference is how service calls are handled and the timeframe a tech will come out to my house like when some idiot ATT guy puts a shovel through my line.