On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 00:01, Jason Holt wrote: > <snip> > Still, your point is well taken - for home users with few assets trying to > keep out low-motivation leechers, 16 days worth of barrier will keep away lots > of nuisances.
Yes, but I've had nothing but hassles trying to get wep working. And that's Windows, which is supposed to make things like that easier. The only platform I've ever got WEP working properly thus far was my powerbook under OS X. And that was with an airport access point. With my linksys, I got wep working with one windows xp client, but not another one. Go figure. Of course, I'm probably doing things wrong. So right now I just have my access point on it's own subnet (acting as a switch, not a router) with my firewall protecting my real network from the wireless, and giving me better control over dhcp. Also, I defend my use of the words "demilitarized zone." In some sense of the term, what I was describing was in fact a network behind a firewall that controls access. Hosts within the DMZ are severely restricted on what they can attack, and the only way through the firewall is through the vpn. Michael > > -J > > > ____________________ > BYU Unix Users Group > http://uug.byu.edu/ > ___________________________________________________________________ > List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list -- Michael Torrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
