I already indicated before: 100-150 Euros more is not a big issue.
Other standards bodies charge very similar amounts for meetings, and
also have very hefty annual membership fees. The IETF is in a very
unusual position, as far as standards bodies goes, in that we strive
for complete openness
On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 05:29:15PM +0100, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>>So instead of forcing key+essid on the clients, would setting the
>>AP's MAC address on the clients be a solution?
>
>not really unless you want to want to be associated with one of 30
>aps for the entire conference...
The problem I r
Joel Jaeggli wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
So instead of forcing key+essid on the clients, would setting the
AP's MAC address on the clients be a solution?
not really unless you want to want to be associated with one of 30
aps for the entire conference...
Right. So label t
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>
> So instead of forcing key+essid on the clients, would setting the AP's
> MAC address on the clients be a solution?
not really unless you want to want to be associated with one of 30 aps for
the entire conference...
> > In fact, the client ca
> From: Alexandru Petrescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...
> Rogue malicious wily ruthless users skilled enough to configure hostap
> can rightfully be blamed; but not the novice user turning on
> a particular vendor's laptop.
That may be true in some situations, but should it be tolerated at
the IETF?
As to the name badges, it seems to me that allowing an optional field
on the
registration form and name badge for name in Unicode seems eminently
fair
to those whose names use a Non-AASCII alphabet.
As far as the bluesheets, I have been told that the only purpose for
these
is to estimate meeting
I'm looking for research / surveys on how enterprises and service providers
really use subnetting within their networks. In particular, I'm interested
in the size of subnets that people are regularly using and I'm interested
in both public and private addressed networks (which I'm assuming, perh
>
> > In fact, the client can't tell the difference between IBSS and BSS.
> > Nor can Linux systems become IBSS systems without something like "hostap"
>
> (hostap is one way, wireless bridging might be another way I think.)
one could have multiple wireless cards in one machine acting as
acces
Michael Richardson wrote:
Why do you think that the helpful drivers that kept us coming up in
IBSS mode (proper name for new "ad-hoc" mode) won't use the keys as
well?
Ok, I didn't know that.
Further, as was said, it does nothing against malicious rogue APs?
Rogue malicious wily ruthless users ski
Michael Richardson wrote:
"Alexandru" == Alexandru Petrescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandru> If my node has mode "managed" it will never attach to laptop
Alexandru> nodes
Alexandru> having same key same essid but mode ad-hoc.
No, that's isn't true.
It is true for:
"
10 matches
Mail list logo
