This is a follow-on to previous post, "Can't assign IP outside of the range set in the DHCP server".

I moved from an Archer C7 to the AX55. In the previous thread, several people expressed the same concern I have over difference in functionality between these two routers (and others):

* On C7, the DHCP "address pool" defines the range of IP addresses to be dynamically assigned. When defining an "address reservation" (which is implicitly a "static" address), you can use any IP address, in or out of the pool. My practice (and it sounds like that of others) is to specify reserved addresses outside the "address pool", leaving it for dynamic addresses only. 

* On AX55, the DHCP "address pool" defines the range of IP addresses that can be set by the router (vs. by a device). That means that the "address pool" defines the address range used by the router to define dynamic addresses as devices that don't specify their own IP address connect and also all "address reservations". 

These are two very different things. In my view, the second operating model ignores the fact that an "address reservation" is really a static address, just one specified on the router instead of on the device. 

If all devices were capable of having an internally defined static address, I wouldn't mind this difference and, in fact, it wouldn't matter to me as with a house with dozens of devices connecting including phones, computers and home automation devices, I would be quite happy to give each individual device their own static address; it would make moving to  a new router a lot simpler. And, to be clear, I and many others see value in having statically defined addresses both to keep things orderly on our home networks but also as it simplifies access between devices, especially if they don't support Bonjour or some other named addressing capability.

However, many of my smart devices provide no way to internally define a static IP address. That's where "address reservations" prove useful.

But I'm not just here to expand on the point others made. The way this works on the AX55 is particularly problematic for me. Here is the scenario:

* When I moved from C7 to AX55 I had to expand the "address pool" from 100-155 to 10-155 (addresses below 10 being reserved for network devices like extenders and such that have static addresses). Without getting into the details, I had devices that only support dynamic addresses in ranges from 10-20, 20-30, etc. 

* On the C7, when a new device connects to the network, it was given an address of 100 or above, outside the range of all my home automation. Now, it can get an address anywhere above 10, even though those ranges are defined for specific types of devices.

* On occasion, I may have a device that has a static IP address (no "reserved address") that goes offline for some period (e.g., one of the grandkids unplugged a smart plug in the guest bedroom and I hadn't known about it). If a new device tries to connect to the network, it could then end up getting the address of that offline device. 

* When the static IP device then comes online again, then all the sudden there is an IP address conflict between it and the other device dynamically assigned the same address. 

Our granddaughter stayed with us for a week and as the printer - assigned a static IP address - had been asleep for days without being used, when she connected her tablet to the network, it was given the address the printer normally uses. Then my wife tried to use the printer and not only did she have trouble connecting but all the sudden I had my wife on me to fix that and my granddaughter complaining she had been bumped from the network in the middle of a game. All of that's my problem, not TP-Link's, but I use it to illustrate WHY so many of us find the way this works on the AX55 to be BROKEN!

Now, as someone who suffered through the recent firmware upgrade DISASTER on this AX55 (thank goodness I still had the C7 to fall back to for a month till things were stable), I want to make a formal request: in a future firmware update, CHANGE THIS FUNCTIONALITY! It seems like you are certainly able to make significant functional changes in a firmware release so PLEASE consider giving the AX55 the same relationship between "address pool" and "address reservations" that the C7 and every other router I've owned have.