As promised last week- thanks everyone for your participation.
http://wirednot.wordpress.com/2014/10/03/results-of-the-wirednot-blog-wlan-pro-survey/?
Lee H. Badman
Network Architect/Wireless TME
ITS, Syracuse University
315.443.3003
**
Participation and subscription information for
Greetings,
I am looking for some input from those who have experience with Aerohive
Wirelsss systems and who have implemented roaming across their campus.
Our wireless network has been configured in such a manner that clients must
obtain new IP space for each building as they move
For those interested, yesterday I worked with a student who had been
complaining of dropping and taking 20 minutes to get a Skype session
going. Turns out her Macbook Pro was on 10.8.5. I recommended she
upgrade to Mavericks (10.9.5) and let me know if it makes a difference.
I received this
Do you have layer 3 roaming enabled on your user profile(s)? Actually,
it's called User Profile/Optional Settings/GRE Tunnels/GRE Roaming for
station isolation, then apply a tunnel policy.
*Van K. Jones*
Network Support Manager
Mississippi College
P: 601.925.3493 | F: 601.925.3955
Facebook
Thanks for responding. We have not implemented roaming and the existing
staff felt it was not the right way to go. I have had great success in the
past implementing other vendor roaming products and was looking for someone
who has the AreoHive system and would share their experience good or
Not sure if any others have tried out 8.0.100.0 code, but thought I'd toss out
our issues with it.
We are running a couple of 5508 HA pairs. The 8.0 code looked okay in testing
but once load hit the controllers (starting seeing issues around 800-1000
clients per WLC), we noticed a few issues.
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 05:13:47PM +, Wyatt Schill wrote:
Not sure if any others have tried out 8.0.100.0 code, but thought I'd toss
out our issues with it.
Been running it here for a month. So far it seems to have been
working flawlessly, apart from one issue we have hit where the
What do you all think of this?
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/10/after-blocking-personal-hotspot-at-hotel-marriott-to-pay-fcc-60/
- Lee Badman
They're trying to enforce their rule making, which means this will likely
end up in court. But yeah, I agree that they're firing a warning shot that
using quarantine features goes against their rules. Can't go to jail for
doing it, but they do have the authority to levy fines.
On Fri, Oct 3,
This isn't going to help things much at all. Having consulted into these
spaces in the past, and as you know as a you have going to a conference,
wifi is just bad in public spaces. Bad bad bad.
I am reminded of Steve Job's snafu in 2010, as so well documented in this
vid:
The first thoughts that pop to my mind are when is it ok to contain an AP that
isn’t a) on your network and b) doesn’t belong to one of your employees? As
it’s being used by a hotel guest the usual security concerns about rogues don’t
apply. Would this be any different than containing an AP
How would you like to have a house next to the Marriot? This type of RF
quarantine on a large scale could lead to worse problems than the devices
present themselves. I think I am with the FCC on this one. We try to educate
our users that they are causing problems for their fellow students and
People bring their own regardless of how good your Wi-Fi is. Many think I pay
for it, it's mine and their is zero be a good radio citizen guidance at time
of purchase.
On Oct 3, 2014, at 2:35 PM, Pete Hoffswell
pete.hoffsw...@davenport.edumailto:pete.hoffsw...@davenport.edu wrote:
This
Everything would be so much simpler if locations would provide Wi-Fi for free
or at a reasonable price.
When a technology is used by everyone (e.g. Electricity) like Wi-Fi, just
include it in the cost of doing business.
Stop charging users for Wi-Fi, especially when the room is already at
Several hotels I've had the pleasure of staying in often will offer a free
wired port, but charge for wifi. Which makes absolutely no sense. I have
the older version of this D-Link portable router
http://us.dlink.com/products/connect/wi-fi-ac750-portable-router-and-charger-3/
that
has been a
On Oct 3, 2014, at 3:45 PM, Frank Sweetser f...@wpi.edu wrote:
I think a good chunk of the use is even more insidious than that. I've been
in a position where I've offered university guests access to our wifi. A
number of these users - smart, highly technical IT professionals - instead
Also security fears of using public Wi-Fi.
Original message
From: Frank Sweetser f...@wpi.edu
Date:10/03/2014 2:45 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Cc:
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN quarantine
features illegal
I
What happens when all these hotspots start interfering with your business
wireless APs and prevent you from conducting business? In the case of a hotel
if all the door access is using wireless to let you in your room and all the
personal hotpots being used by guests are preventing doors from
What happens when all these hotspots start interfering with your business
wireless APs and prevent you from conducting business? In the case of a hotel
if all the door access is using wireless to let you in your room and all the
personal hotpots being used by guests are preventing doors
I just saw this on CNN and jumped on the list to post. Using your own AP is
against the AUP everyone signs at our institution. Now I wonder if that clause
is invalid.
-Brian
Sent from my Galaxy S4. Tiny keyboards=typing mistakes. Verify anything sent.
-Original Message-
From: Frank
While I suspect the FCC could potentially dictate that we are not allowed to
use ACTIVE measures to disassociate users from access points not within our
control, I would think they have no authority to dictate what devices we allow
to be connected to our network. So, students could run an
I think Josh is right. This is public airspace. FCC's decision seems to
enforce this. Everyone has the right to use it, as everyone has the right
to use the highway, and thus traffic jams we get.
-
Pete Hoffswell - Network Manager
pete.hoffsw...@davenport.edu
http://www.davenport.edu
On
I suspect the clause will still be valid, but we cannot use wireless
countermeasures to enforce them. Telling students to turn them off, disabling
wired ports, student discipline, etc are outside the FCC's jurisdiction it
seems to me.
Thomas Carter
Network and Operations Manager
Austin College
Yeah, but this does no good for cellular mifi wifi access points.
But you guys are right. Ethernet-bound rogue access points. Shut off
ethernet. Problem sorta solved.
-
Pete Hoffswell - Network Manager
pete.hoffsw...@davenport.edu
http://www.davenport.edu
On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 5:07 PM,
It's not that it's invalid, but we just can't (shouldn't) enforce it
using our radios. We can enforce it politically (grievances against
people who refuse to remove the APs).
--
Hunter Fuller
Network Engineer
VBRH M-9B
+1 256 824 5331
Office of Information Technology
The University of Alabama in
Ubsubscribe
I retired, email quota lowered, much as I enjoy the list please unsubscribe me
for now.
Hope to see you all around.
Cheers,
John Garner
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] on
Likewise, I am retiring and need to leave this listserv, please
unsubscribe me.
Many thanks,
Art Ripley
Ubsubscribe
I retired, email quota lowered, much as I enjoy the list please unsubscribe me
for now.
Hope to see you all around.
Cheers,
John Garner
Hi,
Every list email to the list states how to unsubscribe ;-)
Either email:
wireless-lan-unsubscribe-requ...@listserv.educause.edu
or follow the info on:
http://www.educause.edu/discuss/participating-constituent-and-discussion-groups
-James
**
Participation and subscription
28 matches
Mail list logo
