I'd argue that wireless LANs are wonderful for small offices and users who
move around offices a lot. We use the Apple Airport/Oronco WaveLAN cards
here in our office (of about seven people).
For large offices, I'm not sure that wireless LAN's are the best option, to
paraphrase Howard, it depend
Three words...
SECURITY - SECURITY - SECURITY
Brad Stanfield
Network/Integration Engineer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Government Micro Resources
Network Operations Control Center
Norfolk Naval Shipyard
Bldg 33 NAVSEA NCOE
757-393-9
At 11:56 AM 10/30/00, Stanfield Hilman B (Brad) CONT NNSY wrote:
>Three words...
>
>SECURITY - SECURITY - SECURITY
Three words:
ENCRYPTION, ENCRYPTION, ENCRYPTION &;-)
How many of us use encryption on wired LANs? Probably not many. But
everyone seems to use encryption on wireless LANs, at leas
chnologies?
Sorry for the overwhelming negativity, but it *is* Monday...
Dale
[=`)
>From: Priscilla Oppenheimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Priscilla Oppenheimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
>Date: Mon, 30 Oct
chnologies?
Sorry for the overwhelming negativity, but it *is* Monday...
Dale
[=`)
>From: Priscilla Oppenheimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Priscilla Oppenheimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
>Date: Mon, 30 Oct
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Priscilla Oppenheimer
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 12:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:RE: Wireless LANS
At 11:56 AM 10/30/00, Stanfield Hilman B (Brad) CONT NNSY wrote:
>Three wo
At 01:05 PM 10/30/00, Chuck Larrieu wrote:
>The disadvantages I can think of for wireless are:
>
>1. It's pretty slow (< 11 Mbps shared bandwidth)
>2. Mobile wireless is fraught with issues. How do you get a new IP address
>when you move from subnet to subnet? (Of course, that's not too
>straight
> 2. Mobile wireless is fraught with issues. How do you get a
> new IP address
> when you move from subnet to subnet? (Of course, that's not too
> straightforward on wired either, come to think of it.)
>
> Priscilla
most of the implementations of WLAN's that we've seen put all the base
statio
WHAT ABOUT WITH THE INTERFERENCE WITH 2.4 GHZ CORDLESS PHONES
REGARDS
-Original Message-
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 2:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
At 11:56 AM 10/30/00, Stanfield Hilman B (Brad) CONT
> >From: Priscilla Oppenheimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: Priscilla Oppenheimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
> >Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:33:33 -0800
> >
> >At 11:56 AM 10/30/00, Stanf
width that they have available to them?
Perry J. Lucas
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Priscilla Oppenheimer
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 3:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
1. It's pretty slow (< 11 Mbps s
illa. One can see why you are still at the top of your
game.
Chuck
-Original Message-
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 1:31 PM
To: Chuck Larrieu; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:RE: Wireless LANS
At 01:05 PM 10/30/00, C
ECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Priscilla Oppenheimer
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 3:34 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
>
> 1. It's pretty slow (< 11 Mbps shared bandwidth)
> 2. Mobile wireless is fraught with issues. Ho
4:53 PM
> To: Dale Holmes; CiscoStudyGroup
> Subject: Re: Wireless LANS
>
>
> Dale,
>
> I think the premise of the argument I am to make is to create
> a lively "debate" type of
> atmosphere. Think about it, if I get up and do a boring (or
> semi lively even)
them?
With broadband yes, it doesn't take many users to eat that up.
>
> Perry J. Lucas
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Priscilla Oppenheimer
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 3:34 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROT
ECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Priscilla Oppenheimer
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 3:34 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
>
> 1. It's pretty slow (< 11 Mbps shared bandwidth)
> 2. Mobile wireless is fraught with issues. Ho
be
more than enough for these folks, assuming the back ends are in place.
Chuck
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Irwin Lazar
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 2:11 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Wireless L
L PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 2:34 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
>
>
> At 11:56 AM 10/30/00, Stanfield Hilman B (Brad) CONT NNSY wrote:
> >Three words...
> >
> >SECURITY - SECURITY - SECURITY
>
> Three words:
>
>
Politically or realistically? :->
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Perry Lucas
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 2:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
Slow? How many end-us
EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 2:11 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
Something to note, the 11MB is shared by all users of the base station, they
don't each get 11MB.
Irwin
> Slow? How many end-users (not servers or datacenters)
&
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
>Irwin Lazar
>Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 2:11 PM
>To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
>Subject:RE: Wireless LANS
>
> << File: Irwin Lazar.vcf >>
>Something to note, the 11MB is shared by all users of the base stati
ehan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 4:53 PM
> > To: Dale Holmes; CiscoStudyGroup
> > Subject: Re: Wireless LANS
> >
> >
> > Dale,
> >
> > I think the premise of the argument I am to make is to create
> > a lively &q
H..unscrupulous is such a *Harsh* word. I would prefer to think of
this as an example of low investment micromarketing niche exploitation.
Joe :)
> but it still
> seems like a great opportunity for some unscrupulous entrepreneur.
>
> Priscilla
_
orfolk Naval Shipyard
Bldg 33 NAVSEA NCOE
757-393-9526
1-800-626-6622
-Original Message-
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 7:38 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
Actually, the application I have in mind involve
Hamlet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Khodaverdian, Hamlet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 16:08:42 -0800
Also, from my experience actual throughput is much less than
Not to mention, do we really want more waves goin thru our bodies..
Brian
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Stanfield Hilman B (Brad) CONT NNSY wrote:
> Three words...
>
> SECURITY - SECURITY - SECURITY
>
>
>
> Brad Stanfiel
Behalf Of
Irwin Lazar
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 5:11 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Wireless LANS
Something to note, the 11MB is shared by all users of the base station, they
don't each get 11MB.
Irwin
> Slow? How many end-users (not servers or datacent
27 matches
Mail list logo
