Is this setup better than having dynamic IP addresses assigned to each
access point in a large building? If so, why?
What is the benefit of having dynamic IP addresses assigned to five devices that are in your control?
For example, if somehow something happens and you need to directly access these access points, how will you do that? With a static address you just go straight to that IP address and do what you have to do. If the addresses are dynamic, what is the drill-down procedure? To scan for the devices—maybe via MAC addresses—and then hunt and peck through each five devices?
In general, if an item is a part of an overall infrastructure, then you should assign a static IP address to it. If an item is a transient device—like desktop/laptop machines or even mobile devices—their network access should be controlled via DHCP with possibly MAC address filtering/assignment for special cases.
Thanks for explaining this clearly. Is it possible that there are in fact five gateways to the same connection, or am I right in assuming this is misinformation? – symlink – 2015-02-06T16:34:10.643
@symlink Each static node connects to the main network connection. So the main connection can be considered a gateway. Or each node could be considered a gateway. It all depends on network terminology and context. – JakeGould – 2015-02-08T06:12:56.383
Even in home setups, it's a good idea to do this: my house has multiple APs (big house, and the rooms we most often use are in corners) as well as a couple network printers, all of which have static IPs to ease configuration. With the APs, it makes it easier to go to a config page if there's an issue; with printers, it makes it easier to enter an IP address to add the printer to a computer. – cpast – 2015-02-08T17:16:09.893