What builds security?

On 10/19/2012 1:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
It does build a security, though.  Security = 1/convenience*0.72

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Simon Westlake <si...@powercode.com <mailto:si...@powercode.com>> wrote:

    Mike,

    I completely agree and I think it is a goal the WISP industry needs to
    work towards - the provisioning of CPE is still a nightmare in
    comparison to DOCSIS. PPPoE is not a good solution, IMO - it's
    arguably
    better than nothing but you shouldn't have to rely on the customer
    supplied equipment being configured correctly to just auth to the
    network - that's the job of the ISP CPE.

    It's not even that hard of a problem to solve in the grand scheme
    of things.

    On 10/13/2012 8:55 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
    > Well yes it is, but I believe the cable industry has it setup
    the best. It's easy for the end user to BYOD and the ISP remains
    hand-off. The WISP industry makes it difficult to do so. Currently
    everything I do is NATed at the CPE, but I'd like to make that
    optional, not a requirement. Obviously for enterprise\wholesale
    level connections I do something different, but there's too many
    hands involved to do that for residential at this time.
    >
    >
    >
    > -----
    > Mike Hammett
    > Intelligent Computing Solutions
    > http://www.ics-il.com
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappydsl.net
    <mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>>
    > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org
    <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
    > Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 8:51:50 AM
    > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti Radios as routers
    >
    > While this is your opinion, others have a different opinion...
    > For what is it worth, It would be nice to have Radius attributes for
    > provisioning the radio..It currently shows it to be on their
    todo list.
    > As for your other item, I believe DHCP relay is built into the new
    > firmware .
    >
    > As far as NAT is concerned, it has it's place.
    >
    > Regards.
    >
    > Faisal Imtiaz
    > Snappy Internet & Telecom
    > 7266 SW 48 Street
    > Miami, Fl 33155
    > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 <tel:305%20663%205518%20x%20232>
    > Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 <tel:305%20663%205518> option 2 Email:
    supp...@snappydsl.net
    >
    > On 10/12/2012 10:50 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
    >> I want to see the removal of doing anything other than DHCP to
    the client's device. The CPE radio pulls it's rate-shaping
    information from RADIUS and allows any number of DHCP clients on a
    per-CPE basis to pull a public IP.
    >>
    >> An ISP doing NAT is just silly.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> -----
    >> Mike Hammett
    >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
    >> http://www.ics-il.com
    >>
    >> ----- Original Message -----
    >> From: "Scott Reed" <sr...@nwwnet.net <mailto:sr...@nwwnet.net>>
    >> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org
    <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
    >> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 8:16:43 PM
    >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti Radios as routers
    >>
    >>
    >> NAT at the at a couple of towers, but not at the CPE.
    >>
    >>
    >> On 10/11/2012 6:52 PM, Sam Tetherow wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Not sure I under stand the no-NAT, so every device on the other
    side of the CPE has it's own public IP?
    >>
    >> On 10/11/2012 4:53 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> We run MT, not UBNT, CPE, but it doesn't matter what brand it
    is. We run them in as routers, but do not NAT. Same benefits
    others mentioned for routing, just one fewer NAT. Never have a
    problem with it this way and can't see any good reason to NAT there.
    >>
    >>
    >> On 10/11/2012 3:46 PM, Arthur Stephens wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> We currently use Ubiquiti radios in bridge mode and assign a ip
    address to the customers router.
    >> He have heard other wisp are using the Ubiquiti radio as a router.
    >> Would like feed back why one would do this when it appears
    customers would be double natted when they hook up their routers?
    >> Or does it not matter from the customer experience?
    >>
    >>
    >> Thanks
    >>
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > Wireless mailing list
    > Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
    > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
    > _______________________________________________
    > Wireless mailing list
    > Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
    > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

    --
    Simon Westlake
    Powercode.com
    (920) 351-1010 <tel:%28920%29%20351-1010>




    _______________________________________________
    Wireless mailing list
    Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
    http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless




_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

--
Simon Westlake
Powercode.com
(920) 351-1010



_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to