Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs
Paul, Similar to the concept that Jason mentioned earlier, I heard of a wireless setup at an Educause conference a while back with separate SSIDs for 2.4 and 5. What helped them, unfortunately can't remember who it was, was adding 'FAST' to the 5Ghz SSID name to help steer users to the 5Ghz band. Once they did that the uptick of devices on the 5Ghz band increased greatly. They had two separate SSIDs before with 2.4 and 5Ghz but it was only after they changed the SSID name to include FAST that they saw that improvement. I also agree that the 2.4 and 5 should not show up in the SSID name. Dave Tevlin Network/ Systems Administrator Georgetown Visitation Prep School On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Osborne, Bruce W (Network Services) < bosbo...@liberty.edu> wrote: > Why not just deploy the 2.4 GHz with the same SSID on a few of the APs? > With our Aruba APs, that is the recommended solution in a dense situation. > > > > > > > > *Bruce Osborne* > > *Wireless Engineer* > > *IT Infrastructure & Media Solutions* > > > > *(434) 592-4229 <%28434%29%20592-4229>* > > > > *LIBERTY UNIVERSITY* > > *Training Champions for Christ since 1971* > > > > *From:* Paul Sedy [mailto:rps...@masters.edu] > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 11, 2015 4:23 PM > *Subject:* Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > We are a Cisco shop and have, up until now, employed a single SSID for > students, supporting both 2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz connections. During this > summer, we have been working to develop sufficient AP density to ensure > good 5Ghz cells throughout our dorms. In the past, we have seen numerous > instances of poorer performance on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum, but up to this > point, have relied on the client to make the decision between these two > options. > > > > We are thinking of deploying two separate SSIDs, a 5Ghz network and a 2.4 > Ghz network, that are exclusive in order to promote a better experience for > the students with devices capable of 5Ghz connectivity. We would probably > use the original SSID name with an appended (5 Ghz) or (2.4 Ghz). > > > > Are any of you currently employing this type of configuration and how well > has it worked for you? > > > > We would appreciate any insights that anyone might have. > > > > Paul Sedy > > The Master’s College > > Director of IT Operations > > 21726 Placerita Canyon Rd, Santa Clarita, CA 91321 > > 661.362.2340 | rps...@masters.edu > > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE > Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE > Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Internet Service Provider Options
Do they have access to any public wifi like xfinity in their area? If they can pick up a signal then that might be another angle to look at. Outside of that there is pfsense and squid to start caching some stuff business side and offload it from the current circuit. Depending on what they do, their mileage may vary. Dave On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Stewart, Joe < joe.stew...@claremontmckenna.edu> wrote: > They are in Upland, CA. There is no airport IT group unfortunately which > is why they reached out to me. I found a WISP provider nearby and they said > they will be able to help us and for cheaper than the monthly cost of the > T1 with almost 4 times the speed . They use (FiberToWireless)point to point > microwave fixed hardware. Installation turnaround time is only 5 days. This > WISPA URL helped me out if anyone else is interested > http://www.wispa.org/Directories/Find-a-WISP > > > > Thanks, > > > > Joe > > > > > > > > *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto: > WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Benedick, Jason > *Sent:* Thursday, July 16, 2015 6:49 AM > *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Internet Service Provider Options > > > > Does he have any contacts with the airport’s IT group? Find out what > provider(s) the airport uses and contact them to see if they’d be willing > to provide them with service or see if they can figure out a way to buy > internet directly from the airport. Another option would be checking to see > if there are any WISPs that operate in the area that he could get service > from. > > > > Thanks, > > Jason R. Benedick > > IT Generalist > > Thaddeus Stevens College of Technology > > Office: (717) 391-6957 Cell: (717) 587-9065 > > > > *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [ > mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > ] *On Behalf Of *Stewart, Joe > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 15, 2015 5:17 PM > *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > *Subject:* [WIRELESS-LAN] Internet Service Provider Options > > > > A friend of mine has a small business housed within a small airport. They > currently have a T1 transport that they’ve outgrown. I was wondering if > anyone has any recommendations on other options within Southern California > that wouldn’t cost an arm and a leg. They only have about 5 computers and 5 > VOIP phones but 3Mbps is hard to deal with when large files are being > downloaded/uploaded simultaneously. They’ve tried calling to get DSL and > Cable and they are striking out on all site surveys through Verizon and > Time Warner. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Joe Stewart > > Network Specialist II > > Claremont McKenna College > > 325 E. 8th Street > > Roberts South # 12 > > Claremont, CA 91711 > > > > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE > Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > > *This electronic communication from TSCT is confidential and > intended solely for use by the individual to whom it is addressed. If you > are not the named recipient do not forward, propagate or replicate this > e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received > this message by mistake and remove from your system. If you are not the > intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing > or taking any action dependent upon the contents of this email or > attachment is strictly prohibited.* > > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE > Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE > Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Meraki Wifi Users: Can you confirm or deny bogus noise values on ap.meraki.com report?
Steve, The last firmware I am showing in the Meraki Dashboard under Configure > General is Jan 13. We don't opt in to Beta firmware and nothing shows as pending. I don't see that non-traffic noise on my MR16 or MR24 models. I too find it ODD that they don't post firmware releases publicly or even tell you specifically what is in them. Did you get the same results from a different mobile device? If you cut bluetooth off on the phone to rule out a buggy bluetooth chip or confirmed with another mobile device then I say bug. Speaking of Meraki bugs though we also noticed that when using their MDM iPad clients who named their devices with an underscore in them would, over time report on the dashboard as named with a hyphen -, while on the device the user never made a change. Accompanying this we found Meraki's system also added a Custom policy to block the client device on all SSIDs. When we inquired they could not reproduce it and so closed it with no action. Disappointingly they also had no audit trail for who made a configuration change that we could have walked back to point to the policy change being applied to the client device by the system. In short they did nothing, and it did not matter that we had a device in hand that the day before was working and the next day had this behavior. I don't hold out hope for their support, unless you have an inside track to an engineer. Dave Tevlin, MS Network/ Systems Admin Georgetown Visitation Prep School On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Steve Bohrer wrote: > Recently, I've noticed that all of my Meraki MR-16 and MR-18 APs report > lots of “Non-802.11 traffic” on their local http://ap.meraki.com test > pages. I believe this was caused by a firmware update, as I’d never > noticed it before I saw the current test page layout after the "early May" > AP update, which we installed on May 9. (Meraki doesn’t seem to make > firmware version numbers available; they just confirm that each AP is “up > to date”.) > > I’m hoping someone else with MR16 or MR18 APs can browse to ap.meraki.com > on any wireless device, and let me know your values for “Non-802.11 > traffic” on the Channel utilization bar graphs. A screen grab from my phone > browser to an MR18 is attached. (MR34 APs do not generally show these bogus > values, though they briefly show utilization values greater than 100% > on page refresh.) > > This should be a quick and easy test, and I’m kinda bummed that after two > weeks, Meraki support has not either confirmed this bug, or told me that > they can’t reproduce it. “Engineering is looking into it” Is all I get. I > suppose it is possible that my whole campus suddenly has lots of radio > noise, but I never saw it with the previous firmware, which had a different > layout for the AP test page, and I’ve had no connectivity problems. > > (Meraki APs all have a built-in mini web server that lets clients easily > check their connection strength and do a local speed test, accessible at “ > ap.meraki.com”, which each Meraki AP will intercept.) > > My last AP firmware update was May 9, but I didn’t happen to check the > ap.meraki.com page until I installed a new MR18 AP on June 12. It showed > lots of noise on 2.4GHz, and then I found this same report throughout > campus, so I opened a ticket. Now most APs show 5 GHz interference as well. > Not a show stopper, as this report is mainly intended for user > troubleshooting, but still would be nice to have some confirmation that it > is just a bug. > > Thanks, > Steve Bohrer > Network Admin, ITS > Bard College at Simon's Rock > 413-528-7645 > > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE > Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Wi-Fi Sense (Windows 10)
What is odd to me in this discussion is that the DOD Secure Technical Implementation Guidelines for Windows Phone 8.1, which currently has Wi-Fi Sense baked in, has no specific setting for this. Nor is it covered under any of the other 25 findings. So much for finding help there. http://www.stigviewer.com/stig/microsoft_windows_phone_8.1/ Dave Tevlin Network/ Systems Administrator Georgetown Visitation Prep School On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 7:30 AM, Osborne, Bruce W (Network Services) < bosbo...@liberty.edu> wrote: > Do you really want to trust your network security to some clueless user? > > > > I noticed that a student apparently got frustrated trying to use their > email address to register on our Guest network rather than use the proper > options. They ended up making this email address. > imastudentandcantconnectdan...@dangit.com > > > > I do not want to trust my security to someone who cannot even grasp the > concept of a separate network for guests. > > > > > > > > *Bruce Osborne* > > *Wireless Engineer* > > *IT Infrastructure & Media Solutions* > > > > *(434) 592-4229 <%28434%29%20592-4229>* > > > > *LIBERTY UNIVERSITY* > > *Training Champions for Christ since 1971* > > > > *From:* Williams, Matthew [mailto:mwill...@kent.edu] > *Sent:* Monday, June 22, 2015 8:37 AM > > *Subject:* Re: Wi-Fi Sense (Windows 10) > > > > Found this type of information on various sites: > > > > “When connecting to a password protected router you are given an > UNCHECKED BY DEFAULT option to share the password with your friends. What > this means is, the user can deliberately share the password they know. > > This is just as secure as any other system because once you give a user a > password they could share it if they chose. Nothing here is "automatic" no > data is being proliferated without user consent. If your employees leak > your password this way, then it's the same as leaking passwords otherwise. > > Again this not an opt-in-by-default scenario. It requires a user knowing a > password to actively choose to share for each router independently.” > > > > Ignoring the ridiculousness of the existence of the feature, it appears to > at least require someone to intentionally turn it on. > > > > Respectfully, > > > > Matthew Williams > > IT Manager, Wireless > > Kent State University > > Office: (330) 672-7246 > > Mobile: (330) 469-0445 > > > > *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [ > mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > ] *On Behalf Of *Osborne, Bruce W > (Network Services) > *Sent:* Monday, June 22, 2015 7:34 AM > *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Wi-Fi Sense (Windows 10) > > > > 802.1X can be quite user-friendly if you use an onboarding tool such as > CloudPath XpressConnect Wizard. > > > > 802.1X was designed for large enterprise networks. The PSK was never > designed to be used in this manner, hence the name WPA2-Personal. > > > > > > > > *Bruce Osborne* > > *Wireless Engineer* > > *IT Infrastructure & Media Solutions* > > > > *(434) 592-4229 <%28434%29%20592-4229>* > > > > *LIBERTY UNIVERSITY* > > *Training Champions for Christ since 1971* > > > > *From:* Joel Coehoorn [mailto:jcoeho...@york.edu ] > *Sent:* Sunday, June 21, 2015 4:48 PM > *Subject:* Re: Wi-Fi Sense (Windows 10) > > > > I don't know. It seems like encryption and authorization are really two > different things that wifi networks have historically conflated. > > For our network, I'd really like a better user-friendly (ie, not .1x) > option that provides good encryption, but assumes you are authorized by > default. Any authorization or policy enforcement should take place at a > different level, so it can include wired connections, too. > > I haven't looked at the implementation details, but if done correctly, > this has the potential to solve an issue with large PSK networks, such that > I could use a Win10 machine to seed the key, without the normal weakness > that anyone who knows the key can decrypt anyone else's traffic. > > Of course, the devil is in the details, and I found it unlikely that the > key sharing mechanism will be adequately secure, or even if it is, that > enough device types will support this fast enough to make it a reasonable > option. > -- > > *From: *Hunter Fuller > *Sent: *6/21/2015 3:08 PM > *To: *WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > *Subject: *Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Wi-Fi Sense (Windows 10) > > Totally unacceptable. > > It's like MS missed one of the main points of PSKs (as opposed to > non-encrypted networks) - to keep people out. > > -- > Hunter Fuller > Network Engineer > VBRH M-9B > +1 256 824 5331 > > Office of Information Technology > The University of Alabama in Huntsville > Systems and Infrastructure > > I am part of the UAH Safe Zone LGBTQIA support network: > http://www.uah.edu/student-affairs/safe-zone > > > On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 9:45 AM, James Andrewartha > wrote: > > Has anyone tried out Wi-Fi
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Outdoor wireless emergency VoIP phone recommendation
To amplify what Jason said about the additional points of failure. I look at the fire alarm systems we have in place. The standard for fire panels now is cellular with a phone line as the backup. That way if you have a cable cut down line it does not immediately send you into fire watch, which comes with all the over time involved, before the repair can be made. I wonder if there is a similar option for emergency phones. Dave Tevlin On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:39 PM, Jason Cook wrote: > We'll be on this path shortly as we are currently replacing our MD110 > with Cisco CUCM. Personally I would stay away from wireless for emergency > phones as you are bringing in more points of failure and not to mentioned > unlicensed spectrum for emergencies. Plus you’ll need power to these points > unless you want to rely on battery/solar…. Which again seems risky for > emergencies. > > > > Our plan has been to either keep an MD110 unit in place (at least on the > main campus) and/or use the cisco voice gateways or ATAs, and/or bring in > PSTN’s directly from a provider. It will depend on cons/pros and costs once > we start designing that part. Though I think Philippe’s comment below is > pretty interesting(or awesome), get it cabled with cat 5/6 and install a > wireless AP, for the phone either wired VOIP or an extra cable for an > analogue service. > > > > > > -- > > Jason Cook > > The University of Adelaide, AUSTRALIA 5005 > > Ph: +61 8 8313 4800 > > > > *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto: > WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Philippe Hanset > *Sent:* Wednesday, 22 April 2015 3:09 AM > *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Outdoor wireless emergency VoIP phone > recommendation > > > > University of Tennessee, Knoxville has more than 60 of these code blue > phones all over campus. > > I always thought “Too bad we didn’t synchronize an effort with the > Telephone Services Department > > to locate outdoor Wi-Fi in it”. Those emergency phones have power and cat5 > running to them! > > > > Philippe Hanset > > www.eduroam.us > > > > > > > > On Apr 21, 2015, at 12:16 PM, Aaron Lamey wrote: > > > > I use analog products from this company: > > > > http://codeblue.com/solution/help-points/ > > > > They have some wireless SIP ones, but I’ve never used one. Has anyone on > the list ever used their SIP products with Cisco CallManager? > > > > > > *Aaron Lamey* > > Director of Network and Telecommunications > > Christian Brothers University > > 650 East Parkway South > > Memphis, TN 38104 > > > > (901) 321- 3480 > ala...@cbu.edu > > www.cbu.edu > > > > > > > > > > *The information contained in this message and or attachments is intended > only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain > confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, > dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, > this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient > is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and > delete the material from any system and destroy any copies.* > > > > > > *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [ > mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > ] *On Behalf Of *Edward Ip > *Sent:* Tuesday, April 21, 2015 11:06 AM > *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > *Subject:* [WIRELESS-LAN] Outdoor wireless emergency VoIP phone > recommendation > > > > Hello, > > > > I am looking for recommendations to replace our aging outdoor emergency > phones. Ideally, I am looking for a wireless (Wi-Fi based) outdoor > emergency VoIP phone to replace our very old landline based outdoor phones. > My initial research has not produced any good candidates yet as well I was > wondering if anyone has had successfully deployed such a system at their > location? Any feedback would be very much appreciated. > > > > We use Aruba APs and Cisco Call Manager in our network. > > > > Regards, > > *Edward Ip* | ITS | Wireless Systems Administrator > > 613 727 4723 | ext 7112 > > *Algonquin College* | 1385 Woodroffe Avenue | Room C316 | Ottawa | Ontario > | K2G 1V8 | Canada > > www.algonquincollege.com > > > > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE > Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE > Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > > > > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE > Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
