Wednesday 19 November 2003, Stig wrote:
> Just want to add that the network worked perfectly for me during the
> entire IETF, I didn't have any problems at plenary either.
>
> Twice in the lobby bar I lost the association with the access point for
> a short while, but apart from that...
>
> I use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stig Venaas wrote:
| Just want to add that the network worked perfectly for me during the
| entire IETF, I didn't have any problems at plenary either.
Mee to. I even had good reception in my room at the doubletree.
leifj
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATUR
Another suggestion (maybe this could even be done for IETF59):
4) Publish a list of known "official" IETF base station MAC addresses,
so that if/when we experience connectivity problems, we can do a
quick check whether we're associated to a rogue base station.
By the way, thanks a lot for y
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> "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 t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> "Alexandru" == Alexandru Petrescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandru> Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>> what exactly is the point of having a wep key shared by 2000 people.
Alexandru> I didn't mean it for data confidentiality; I meant it for
Alexa
Kevin C. Almeroth wrote:
It might be a good idea to stop comparing Minneapolis to Vienna. Vienna
had a host and Minneapolis did not.
I'm not sure there should be any difference. I was the host in Adelaide
but I didn't do the radios, I "out sourced" them to a local company that
specialises in th
escom wrote:
The purpose of the protocol is to manage over the internet the
information stored in a RF-ID tag. More in detail the idea is to
develop a crittography system and a certification authority.
To encrypt the data stored into the tag will be necessary to prevent
frauds on the tagged p
Well I was one satisfied customer :-)
> ---In other news--
> (Think Red Cross, don't think Power Company)
>
> I had six people come up to me on Thursday to let me know
> that their wireless
> connection was acceptable (they used words like great, and no
> problems). I
> hope that mor
Just want to add that the network worked perfectly for me during the
entire IETF, I didn't have any problems at plenary either.
Twice in the lobby bar I lost the association with the access point for
a short while, but apart from that...
I used 802.11b most of the time.
I don't know if I'm excep
I appreciate the prompt response. A few points of clarification:
The contention was that there was no WG decision, because there was no
consistent technical basis for the question. It is impossible to judge
'correctness' without some defining scope. When the responsible AD & Chair
use clarificati
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
> Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> >>We've noticed that setting both the essid and the key helps a lot with
> >>the automatic detection various procedures, such as end-user laptops
> >>don't get automatically attached to essid's that happen to be advertised
> >>
Joel Jaeggli wrote:
We've noticed that setting both the essid and the key helps a lot with
the automatic detection various procedures, such as end-user laptops
don't get automatically attached to essid's that happen to be advertised
without keys by other end-users' laptops.
I expect you'll get a
Pekka Savola wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
-for the general public, set the AP's with both an essid and a key,
in Infrastructure mode (managed).
-for the aodv public, convene to use a different essid and a
different key and ad-hoc mode. If the aodv people need several
a
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
> Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> > what exactly is the point of having a wep key shared by 2000 people.
>
> I didn't mean it for data confidentiality; I meant it for building the
> wires W in WEP not for the P privacy. Basically one such W for ietf and
> on
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
> -for the general public, set the AP's with both an essid and a key, in
> Infrastructure mode (managed).
>
> -for the aodv public, convene to use a different essid and a different
> key and ad-hoc mode. If the aodv people need several ad-hoc mod
Joel Jaeggli wrote:
what exactly is the point of having a wep key shared by 2000 people.
I didn't mean it for data confidentiality; I meant it for building the
wires W in WEP not for the P privacy. Basically one such W for ietf and
one for aodv.
We've noticed that setting both the essid and the
what exactly is the point of having a wep key shared by 2000 people.
except to have another thing for people to screw up when they try and type
it in our paste it. thereby increasing the support overhead at the help
desk.
joelja
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
> Hi, I was not a
Hi, I was not at the last IETF, and couldn't see live the reportedly bad
workings of WLAN. I am not going to make suggestions to 58crew since
I'm certain they've already tried lots of configurations. Just to share
our thoughts on how we make work several
independent/deterministic-behaviour 802.11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<>
Thanks, I didn't know about that one. For more on WLAN and trains,
google the following:
-NetSeal Avecra (in-train restauration's cashier syncs with station's
mainframe)
-Virgin in UK (WLAN hotspots alongside tracks)
-GNER in UK
-Click TGV in France
-PointShot in the
There are going to be *at least* three desirable encodings of a person's
identity -- the 'natural' encoding in the preferred/native charset of the
person's name, some kind of phonetic-ASCII encoding that tells non-natives
how to pronounce the name, and the email/idna encoding[s] that folks would
us
Is that 11xx as in local group address or xx00 as in universal
unicast?
Tom Petch
-Original Message-
From: Adam Roach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 'Theodore Ts'o' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Brett Thorson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMA
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
com>, Adam Roach writes:
>Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>
>> Would it be possible to publish a list of MAC addresses that were
>> operating in ad-hoc or AP mode? If all of the happened to come from a
>> signle manufacturer, that might be a very interesting data point.
>
>A lot
Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Would it be possible to publish a list of MAC addresses that were
> operating in ad-hoc or AP mode? If all of the happened to come from a
> signle manufacturer, that might be a very interesting data point.
A lot -- possibly even a majority -- of the cards I saw operating i
On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 10:52, Richard Shockey wrote:
> EPCglobal is focusing on the standards though I suspect there are aspects
> of the protocols being discussed that should come to the IETF or IEEE for
> proper peer review and/or standardization. There is an extensive discussion
> of the use o
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 19-nov-03, at 22:28, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
It should be RFID, cheaper, and easier, not only for the blue sheets.
Wouldn't it be even cheaper if everyone who has a laptop with wireless
with them signs in on an electronic version of the blue sheets? This
just
At 08:45 AM 11/20/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Besides what Bill Manning said about reviewing
what's been done in the auto-id center (now closed),
there are a number of research projects/initiatives
around the world (e.g., Japan's ubiquitous id center at
uidcenter.org). For a list of some relate
On 19-nov-03, at 22:28, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
It should be RFID, cheaper, and easier, not only for the blue sheets.
Wouldn't it be even cheaper if everyone who has a laptop with wireless
with them signs in on an electronic version of the blue sheets? This
just takes a few hours of fiddling
Actually, I think RFID is much more expensive than bar codes, and
it's even more expensive the more you use it.
With barcode, you pay once for the readers. Printing barcodes on badges
doesn't cost anything. RFID tags cost money every time you make a badge,
plus the readers are what, 10X the cost
Dave Crocker wrote:
>> What I would suggest, if we do this, is writing the person's name
>> *twice*: once in their native character set, and once in a form that
>> an english-reader can read. The latter is an established interchange
>> architecture
>
> I believe that was the intention in the pro
Besides what Bill Manning said about reviewing
what's been done in the auto-id center (now closed),
there are a number of research projects/initiatives
around the world (e.g., Japan's ubiquitous id center at
uidcenter.org). For a list of some related resources,
see:
http://www.itu.int/osg/spu/
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
It should be RFID, cheaper, and easier, not only for the blue sheets.
How would RFID be cheaper than barcodes? Someday, maybe, but today the
tags are expensive--according to CNet, "depending on volume, customers
can expect to pay 30 cents to $1 per radio tag". The I
The purpose of the protocol is to manage over the
internet the information stored in a RF-ID tag. More in detail the idea is to
develop a crittography system and a certification authority.
To encrypt the data stored into the tag will be
necessary to prevent frauds on the tagged products.
<>
http://www.computerworld.com/mobiletopics/mobile/story/0,10801,87322,00.html
?f=x68
So at least we know one place not to take the WiFi-enabled horde that is the
IETF road-show!
Then again...
/gordon
On 20-nov-03, at 4:05, James Seng wrote:
I think having the punycode form have no "value" on a name badge.
Punycode, as it is designed, is meant for machine-to-machine
communication.
So why don't we come up with a machine-to-human transliteration
mechanism? So if someone called ÎÎáÏ (trouble wi
34 matches
Mail list logo
