The opposite of convenience and standardization. You do things your way, I do things my way, another guy does things his way - makes it hard to jump from network to network from a white hat or black hat perspective.
Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Simon Westlake <si...@powercode.com> wrote: > 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>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> >> > To: "WISPA General List" <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 >> > Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 <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> >> >> To: "WISPA General List" <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 >> > 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 <%28920%29%20351-1010> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing > listWireless@wispa.orghttp://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 > >
_______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
