H500 Ignores Subnet Mask
This happens when "detecting" cameras and devices on the same network, the H500 use the first 3 bytes of the IPv4 address (class C) and ignores the subnet mask. For example, on a 10.10.0.0 network with a 255.255.0.0 subnet mask (class B), devices with address 10.10.1.1 and 10.10.2.2 should be considered on the same network.
I had this problem in setup today because I use a class B 10.x.x.x network at home. Unknown devices get a 10.5.1.x address and I move them to 10.5.2.x static assignments when identified. I had moved the cameras to 10.5.2.x and plugged in the H500. It would "see" the cameras but not allow them to be added claiming they were "not on the same network". When I moved the H500 to a 10.5.2.x address and rebooted it, it then allowed the cameras to be added.
- Copy Link
- Subscribe
- Bookmark
- Report Inappropriate Content
This doesn't seem to be the expected situation, your case might require further analysis. To help assist and streamline the identification of the behavior, we recommend sending an email to forumsupport.usa@tp-link.com with the following information:
Subject: [Forum Escalation][ID 862652] H500 Ignores Subnet Mask
Forum Nickname: the_stood
Thread URL: https://community.tp-link.com/us/smart-home/forum/topic/862652
Product Info (Model, Hardware&Firmware Versions, Mac address, etc): [User Provided]
Description: [User Provided]
Any Other Relevant Information (Logs, Config Files, Images, etc.): [User Provided]
*To better analyze the issue, we recommend taking screenshots of your relevant settings and any error messages, and providing them to the support team. This includes your router network settings, as well as any errors or messages shown in the app when trying to connect the camera both before and after modifying the IP on the H500.
Also, please provide your router model. If you’re using multiple routers or network devices, please share a basic description or diagram of your network setup (network topology).
Once sent, a ticket will be created in our support system, and a team member will follow up to gather more information or troubleshoot the issue.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Regarding the situation you reported, we performed identical tests but were unable to reproduce the problem under our standard conditions.
This suggests the issue might be specific to your environment. Could you please review your subnet for any special configurations, such as VLAN isolation or access rules? These can sometimes lead to inconsistent behavior.
If you make any new findings, or if you’ve been working with our support team, please feel free to share any updates here. What you discover might help other users who could run into something similar down the line.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
@the_stood By the way, may i ask why you have such a network setup? Any particular reason for it?
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
the_stood wrote
sure. for a given 10.x.y.y class B network (16 bits for host space), I use the 3rd dotted quad to segment device types (servers, pcs, sensors, lights, network infrastructure, unknown, banned, etc) and that leaves 255 address for each device type. I reserve one slot for unknown / unidentified dhcp hosts. that way I can easily filter/firewall/monitor them before assigning them a permanent static dhcp address. new devices like cameras when they're first plugged in show up in this pool while the H500 has a permanent address in another segment. they're all in the same 16-bit network/broadcast space and should be treated as such, but it appears from my testing that the H500 may hard code class C network broadcast/filtering and not honor the class B it's part of. the cameras will be assigned a permanent static dhcp address after they're configured.
That's a massive network. Do you actually have that many devices? Is this for a home network or a commercial/business one?
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
@Wayne-TP the current setup includes five 10.x networks in a WAN and at least one of those networks has over 300 devices. so this might be technically overkill if you want to pack IPs. but there's no real reason to do that. and this setup makes nomralized management and curation incredibly simple.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Information
Helpful: 0
Views: 312
Replies: 6
Voters 0
No one has voted for it yet.