That subject line should say
"WISPA's Recent FCC Filing"
On 9/23/2012 11:22 PM, Jack Unger wrote:
Section 706 of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended (1996 Act),
requires the FCC to determine and report
As part of the WiFi standard a AP can tell a client to stop talking to it.
Rogue AP containment systems impersonate the targeted AP and send these
messages to observed clients.
This kind of functionality is important in cases where you need to prevent
employees from accidentally creating security
Cisco has this functionality. I would think if it were illegal, they would
be slapped pretty hard.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/wireless/ncs/1.0/configuration/guide/sol.html#wp1040128
Tagging and Containing Rogue Access Points
When the Cisco Unified Wireless Network Solution is monitored
Motorola also has AirDefense as part of their portfolio. Only difference is
that it can be installed without their WLAN solution (instead using
sensors).
http://www.airdefense.net/products/servicesplatform/securitycompliance/secur
ity.php#eliminate
Daniel White
(303) 746-3590
From:
Did any of you read the original posters question?
I understand that the technology is out there to squash ROUGE AP's.
Let me make this a little simpler. Lets' say we have an office building
with 6 floors and each floor is leased to a different tenant.
Lets say that the tenant on the fourth
That's not how the system works. The other Tenants would still be using
their OWN wireless network, only the floor that deployed Cisco WLC would be
'squashing' the rouge AP's from their OWN network.
Z
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Doug Clark d...@txox.com wrote:
Did any of you read the
Regarding what you wrote below (I'm assuming you're not copying and pasting
another person's question since you didn't indicate it's a quote) if the
tenant who deploys rogue countermeasures against other tenant's APs, I'm
not sure it's *RF* interference. It's not interfering with the RF signal of
Hi,
Does anyone know where I can find the PoE lightning protector for MT router
board 411?
Eduardo
- Original Message -
From: Doug Clark
To: WISPA General List
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 10:35 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Can they really do this?
Did any of you
I believe the rogue countermeasures *could* be configured to disassociate
the other tenant's clients from the other tenant's AP.
Greg
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Zach Mann zma...@gmail.com wrote:
That's not how the system works. The other Tenants would still be using
their OWN wireless
So in turn, becoming exactly what it's trying to prevent??? A Rogue AP
from the viewpoint of the other tenants who are simply trying to do
business on a different floor.
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe the rogue countermeasures *could* be
We have them in stock.
Thx,
Jim Patient
Link Technologies, Inc.
314-735-0270 x102
http://wlan1.com
http://towercoverage.com http://towercoverage.com/
http://www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net/
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Do you have some recommendation for lightning surge protector to use it between
a PowerBridgeM5 and the PoE?
Thanks,
Eduardo
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Obviously the intended/proper use isn't to interfere with other people's
legit networks. The intended use is to prevent rogue networks within your
own area where you want to maintain network security.
So in the case you mention, the proper configuration is to whitelist the
other tenants'
Not trolling, what you explain makes perfect sense. The original posters
question is what threw me off.
On Sep 24, 2012 10:25 AM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:
Obviously the intended/proper use isn't to interfere with other people's
legit networks. The intended use is to prevent rogue
Hi all,
Cogent approached us recently, trying to sell us a 100M/100M Internet
pipe. Anyone using them for upstream? Has your experience been generally
positive or negative?
Thanks,
Adam
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
I have used them in the past and they were fantastic! I don't think I ever
had downtime from them and the price was one of the best I found. I
connected to them in St. Louis for what it's worth
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
It is cheap if they have presence!
On Sep 24, 2012 5:55 PM, Zach Mann zma...@gmail.com wrote:
Solid company ... Network very rarely has any blips. Not the cheapest
when it comes to a gig though.
On Sep 24, 2012 4:48 PM, Jason Hensley ja...@hensleycrew.com wrote:
I have used them in the
Love them~
Victoria Proffer
President/CEO
314-974-5600
St. Louis Broadband, LLC
www. StLouisBroadband.com
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Adam Greene
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 4:32 PM
To: WISPA General List
No problems and their 1st level tech support actually have a clue about
BGP.
On 09/24/2012 06:46 PM, Victoria Proffer wrote:
Love them~
Victoria Proffer
President/CEO
314-974-5600
St. Louis Broadband, LLC
www. StLouisBroadband.com
-Original Message-
From:
We have 1gig pipe connecting from 900 Walnut in STL. No problems, we
get the speed and support is great. Engineer who knew how to
troubleshoot answered the phone when I called the 800 number for
support. Problem was with transport provider, but their support is so
good, I actually hoped it was
That statement alone sys a lot. We have a client with an MPLS network at
Megapath- they don't do BGP. :-(
Bret Clark bcl...@spectraaccess.com wrote:
No problems and their 1st level tech support actually have a clue about
BGP.
On 09/24/2012 06:46 PM, Victoria Proffer wrote:
Love them~
Great network. Great support. Much better than they were 5 years ago.
As
with any other provider they do have issues from time to time. It goes
without saying get 2 upstreams and do BGP.
Justin
--
Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net
Aol Yahoo IM: j2sw
http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP
22 matches
Mail list logo
