I am using an integration (see link below) that breaks when the IP address of the the device changes. For various reasons I can’t configure the router to reserve the IP address for the MAC address, and ideally I’d prefer not to need to.
Is there are standard way for integrations to record and connect to device by their MAC address (or something else) rather than use and store the initially configured IP address directly? This feels like a general case relevant to most devices and would be a more robust method in a changing LAN network. I noticed in the Network Discovery section in settings in lists devices so assume it has much of the capability generating that information.
The standard way os either the integration deals with static ip addressing or it can handle its own dynamic addressing. This sounds like it only does static.
(and yes you’re hearing me say a blanket rewrite doesn’t exist bec each integration is different and nobody knows what to rewrite.)
The answer is dhcp and an ip reservation or a static. And you say both are out. Because equipment? Or? (because that’s the REAL fox here solve THAT)
Not setting a static/reserved I address is really to stop needing to set up devices in two different systems (the router & HA) if it can be avoided, as that is extra work and likely to lead to errors if it can be automated/avoided.
I was thinking HA would have a getIP(MAC address), with the best practice pattern being the device MAC is stored (as it can be assumed to not change) and the IP is assumed to change (e.g. with appropriate caching). Appreciate MAC spoofing and the like exist, but then that is not really an issue for most integration devices.
Thus integration developers can by default use a repeatable and robust approach defined for HA, rather than worrying about network configs, and me as a user don’t need to care at all once it is working.
I thought it would be possible and desirable for LAN based integrations but maybe there are too many variations.
For me, the IP addresses are managed where I manage my network. Thus for me.the IPs get managed in UniFi everything else bows to its superiority. It’s authoritative.
It does not absolve me of managing things in HA. (for instance, esphome while it CAN manage itself in a dynamic ip environment I find it solves a lot of issues to assume it doesn’t and stuff the static ip in the build Def.
So my rec would be manage ip at the switch if you can and the. Use it as system of record. If anything gets wonk then repair to match sys of rec.
(you really can’t get away from not assigning a few statics might as well keep them all in one place)
This system exists, but each integration has to use the system. Your integration in question chose IP address over using the discovery systems in place to get any other identifiable device information, so you’re stuck using a static IP.